You Tube exposure.

Discuss the latest news and rumors in the magic world.
Edward Pungot
Posts: 512
Joined: May 18th, 2011, 1:55 am

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Edward Pungot » June 23rd, 2018, 10:46 pm

Grass-roots magic via a petition with IBM backing?

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 7913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jonathan Townsend » June 23rd, 2018, 11:10 pm

A similar argument was made to the folks who moderate/edit Wikipedia - that it's not useful to describe the method behind magic tricks in the same page as the effect. Here's the discussion
and a link to some of what went on then.
Let's see how this round goes.
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Tom Moore
Posts: 444
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Tom Moore » June 24th, 2018, 4:44 pm

So a serious question - how is the local library stocking magic books different to YouTube? My local library in the tiny village I grew up in had loads of magic books (not just the absolute beginners ones- they had illusions and stage magic) that were decades old so had exactly the same “permanence” as YouTube videos do.

The layman won’t accidentally discover YouTube magic exposure videos unless they actively search for them, just as I wouldn’t discover the magic books in my local library unless I actively search for them. Obviously it’s slightly easier to do a YouTube search from my phone but it still requires a deliberate choice to hunt for secrets and I’m not sure there’s that many people would go hunting for lots of youtube exposure videos who would not also be the sort of person to go hunting in the library 30 years ago?
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » June 24th, 2018, 5:09 pm

God Almighty! What a load of twaddle!

The local library is not in your home or at the tip of your fingers on your phone! Your local library does not have search engines. And the odds are that the trick you are trying to find the secret of is not in your local library anyway. And it takes EFFORT to go to your local library and casual enquirers are not going to go to that trouble. And if they do then they will deserve the secret as it is very likely they will take up magic as a hobby.

It is NOT "slightly" easier to search from your phone. It is VASTLY easier and you can even do it during the actual performance of the trick and this has actually happened.

I find your attitude reprehensible. You are not only showing a passive "can't be bothered" attitude to the matter which is bad enough but you are actively defending the OTHER side of the argument. And in a more vociferous manner than even a You Tube employee would. I bet I get more sympathy from Susan than I would ever get from you even if she doesn't go along with my suggestion. Quite disgraceful. Sorry, Tom. You do not deserve to be called a MAGICIAN.

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 24th, 2018, 5:19 pm

I agree 100% with Mark Lewis on this. This is a massive problem facing magic, and like gravity, it cannot be ignored. Whether you like it or not - this issue will literally define magic over the next few decades.

Kids these days have smartphones. They have the internet in their pocket. And they are in the habit of looking up any piece of trivia/information that they want to recall. So if you show a group of kids a trick - they will definitely be searching for the secret on their phone. Unless they were not that engaged in the first place. And you don't even have to type anyhting into your phone. Just a simple request to Siri.

"Siri - Coin in Bottle - Explanation"

"Siri - Card trick - Reds and Blacks - Explanation"

"Siri - Card on Ceiling - Explanation"

This is a million miles away from walking to a local library and looking up a bunch of tricks that are mainly self-working tricks aimed at beginners from an old magic book.

Using your smartphone to look up something that confuses you is second nature to kids these days. It is a habit that is ingrained into them and is something they do a couple of times an hour. It is a skill in itself which you can become very good at. Having an intuitive understanding of how the internet works and how to find what you are looking for.

And if a magician does well with a marketed trick on TV - it will end up getting exposed to millions on YouTube as well.

Andy over at The Jerx recognises that this is a big issue facing magic as well. He has already posted some thoughts on how to tackle it. And I am hoping he will publish some more. Michael Weber has discussed this problem in the past. And now you have Mark Lewis chiming in with the same concerns.

I agree with Mark. A trick where the secret is exposed is like a burst balloon. I am not against teaching tricks to laypeople under certain conditions. A bit like with Penn & Teller - sometimes the secret can be more entertaining than the trick. And it can set up the spectator for a surprise ending. But to imagine that a spectator can easily find out the secret to most of the strongest tricks in magic within seconds of showing them it is not a problem is very naive.

For better or worst - if you are a professional close-up magician, you end up getting drawn to the same 30 tricks. Since they are the best tricks when it comes to strength/reset/angles and so on. Everyone of those tricks has now being exposed to millions of people on YouTube. And if you perform them to a layperson, they could easily look up the secret even before you have finished the trick.

And it is only going to get much worst in the future.

There are sneaky ways to address this issue. But there is no easy solution just yet. Like I say - I am hoping Andy will discuss this topic some more since I am sure his cunning brain will find other ways to lead laypeople down the garden path in such a way they are unable or uninterested in looking up the secret to a trick.

Here are a couple of posts from Andy discussing this topic:

https://thejerx.squarespace.com/?offset=1470812400256

http://www.thejerx.com/blog/2018/3/14/four-uses-of-exposure

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 24th, 2018, 5:20 pm

I didn't see Mark's latest post before typing the above. So apologies for making some of the same points as him!

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 24th, 2018, 5:37 pm

Penn Jillette was chatting to Sergey Brin (one of the co-founders of Google) a few years ago. And by chance - Sergey had become really interested in the faro shuffle. So they ended up chatting about that for a bit. So perhaps Sergey has a minor interest in magic to be interested enough to take this issue seriously?

Personally - I don't see this issue ever being addressed by Google/YouTube. People have an itch they need to scratch when it comes to finding certain types of information. Celeb gossip, porn, magic secrets. It has a certain voyeuristic thrill to it. And as such - there will always be a demand for it. And the major internet companies will never get to a stage where they feel it is worth the hassle and backlash of banning exposure videos.

The other major issue is how easily it is to buy magic tricks online as well.

https://metro.co.uk/2015/04/21/we-now-know-how-magician-jamie-raven-did-his-awesome-britains-got-talent-card-trick-and-you-too-can-do-it-at-home-5160243/

Edward Pungot
Posts: 512
Joined: May 18th, 2011, 1:55 am

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Edward Pungot » June 24th, 2018, 6:59 pm

Make yourself more interesting than your tricks. (I.e. Dai Vernon and Billy McComb)

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 7913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jonathan Townsend » June 24th, 2018, 9:21 pm

Without sliding into the obvious reductio ad absurdum*... There are larger social dialogues about who or what determines access to information while others insist on a panopticon for reasons of safety. Is a technical discussion of a sleight with video supposed to be flagged as "spoiler" or "porn" or "IP/Trade Secret Violation" and by who? Ultimately that's a social question between "look if you want" and "privilege".

We don't often hear of hecklers yelling punchlines at comics - or yelling back lines during plays. There's an understood audience dynamic. If you treat your routines as playlets - the problems of technology, provenance and naming become secondary to considerations of production and performance.

Spoiler: Look at an old book about Geometry in Arabic while thinking about H. P. Lovecraft. /Spoiler <-that almost happened via what someone else used as "Wolf, Ram and Hart".

*Folks want an open market for items, teaching materials, property rights... yet without all the other social basics which keep theatrical production work away from our craft.
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Tom Moore
Posts: 444
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Tom Moore » June 24th, 2018, 9:39 pm

Let’s try to cut down on the insults mark - there’s a fine topic here to discuss and you don’t need to ruin it by calling anyone who disagrees with you names.

I’m curious about your data - yes some people shout they’ve looked something up on YouTube but I’m not convinced it’s significantly more than. The number of people who would have thought that they knew how it was done before the internet was invented? There’s also a general trend for audiences to be more abrupt and vocal these days to take in to account - basically just how do we properly define and attribute the problem.

I’m also curious about your instance you are defending the “art” of magic by protecting over-performed cliched effects from exposure ; surely more is being done to advance and nourish the art by striving for more; new and diverse performances rather than everyone knocking out the same tricks?
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 886
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby MagicbyAlfred » June 24th, 2018, 9:55 pm

Joe McKay Wrote: "Penn Jillette was chatting to Sergey Brin (one of the co-founders of Google) a few years ago. And by chance - Sergey had become really interested in the faro shuffle. So they ended up chatting about that for a bit. So perhaps Sergey has a minor interest in magic to be interested enough to take this issue seriously? Personally - I don't see this issue ever being addressed by Google/YouTube..."

I was curious to learn more of Sergey Brin, so here is what I found (using GOOGLE, of course):

Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin is a Russian-born American computer scientist and internet entrepreneur. Together with Larry Page, he co-founded Google. Brin is the President of Google's parent company Alphabet Inc. Wikipedia
Born: August 21, 1973 (age 44 years), Moscow, Russia
Net worth: 52.1 billion USD (2018) Forbes
Spouse: Anne Wojcicki (m. 2007–2015)

Quote from Sergey:
"Obviously everyone wants to be successful, but I want to be looked back on as being very innovative, very trusted and ethical and ultimately making a big difference in the world." - Sergey Brin

His spouse has the same surname as the CEO of YouTUBE. Wonder what the relation is?

He wants to be looked back on as being "trusted and ethical." Curious who might see an ethical issue with YouTube allowing the posting of the reveal/exposure videos? Perhaps Sergey would be a good one to appeal to. Does he understand this is harmful to magicians, both professional and amateur, magical creators, authors and editors, producers of videos, the art of magic, and arguably even the audiences or potential audiences who love or wish to enjoy the mystery of magic? BTW It is not just old tricks that are being exposed. It's newly created ones and new marketed effects, as well.

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » June 24th, 2018, 11:17 pm

Edward Pungot wrote:Make yourself more interesting than your tricks. (I.e. Dai Vernon and Billy McComb)


I AM more interesting than the tricks! But that is only because it is ME making the tricks interesting. And by making the tricks interesting because I am so interesting it makes the bastards look up the secrets on you tube.

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » June 24th, 2018, 11:36 pm

Tom Moore wrote:Let’s try to cut down on the insults mark - there’s a fine topic here to discuss and you don’t need to ruin it by calling anyone who disagrees with you names.

I’m curious about your data - yes some people shout they’ve looked something up on YouTube but I’m not convinced it’s significantly more than. The number of people who would have thought that they knew how it was done before the internet was invented? There’s also a general trend for audiences to be more abrupt and vocal these days to take in to account - basically just how do we properly define and attribute the problem.

I’m also curious about your instance you are defending the “art” of magic by protecting over-performed cliched effects from exposure ; surely more is being done to advance and nourish the art by striving for more; new and diverse performances rather than everyone knocking out the same tricks?


I am not calling anyone names. I am renowned for my tact and discretion. I wouldn't dream of calling people who disagree with me twits of the first order who as magicians couldn't make the contents of an empty box disappear.

I merely said you are not a magician. And you aren't. You are not a performer. You are merely a back room boy who creates and invents new things which may or may not be wonderful so you can make money out of it. Thus you have an agenda against classic secrets of magic which you condescendingly describe as over-performed cliched effects. Well, I'll tell you what. You perform your original wonderful illusion for laymen and I will do the sponge ball trick to the same laymen. We'll see who gets the better reaction. Originality is over rated. I learned that a long, long, long time ago.

Now I don't give a stuff what you think about my estimation of my "data". I am a PERFORMER while you aren't. It is my job to know what laymen are doing or thinking. It is your job to know what TV producers and people in the entertainment business are thinking so you can get money out of them. Two different things. And I KNOW that You Tube is a problem as does every magician who hears, "I know that one. I saw it on you tube" or if they are any good "I will look that up on You Tube"

Sure, it is not a massive problem at the moment but it is a hell of a lot bigger problem than it was even two years ago. And it will become a bigger problem still in the future. And in 20 years time magic will be dead because everybody knows how the tricks are done. And you will be done too because your business will decline as the popularity of magic declines because it is no longer a secret art.

I can handle all this because I have a sufficient repertoire of material that would be difficult to look up on you tube. However, in the long run it will do great harm to the art of magic. I still remember John Scarne writing something like, "A magic secret is like a precious diamond. It should be guarded carefully" I took it to heart and although I never, ever became an anti-exposure fanatic in the past even I have had to draw a line in the sand regarding this. In the long run it will be very, very, very bad for magic if something is not done to at least try to stop it.

I am finding it shameful and indicative about the level of passion people here have for a very ancient and honourable art form to be met with negativity when it is gently suggested that we might try and defend it.

At least I am trying. So are the rest of you but in a different way. Very trying indeed.

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » June 24th, 2018, 11:45 pm

MagicbyAlfred wrote:Joe McKay Wrote: "Penn Jillette was chatting to Sergey Brin (one of the co-founders of Google) a few years ago. And by chance - Sergey had become really interested in the faro shuffle. So they ended up chatting about that for a bit. So perhaps Sergey has a minor interest in magic to be interested enough to take this issue seriously? Personally - I don't see this issue ever being addressed by Google/YouTube..."

I was curious to learn more of Sergey Brin, so here is what I found (using GOOGLE, of course):

Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin is a Russian-born American computer scientist and internet entrepreneur. Together with Larry Page, he co-founded Google. Brin is the President of Google's parent company Alphabet Inc. Wikipedia
Born: August 21, 1973 (age 44 years), Moscow, Russia
Net worth: 52.1 billion USD (2018) Forbes
Spouse: Anne Wojcicki (m. 2007–2015)

Quote from Sergey:
"Obviously everyone wants to be successful, but I want to be looked back on as being very innovative, very trusted and ethical and ultimately making a big difference in the world." - Sergey Brin

His spouse has the same surname as the CEO of YouTUBE. Wonder what the relation is?

He wants to be looked back on as being "trusted and ethical." Curious who might see an ethical issue with YouTube allowing the posting of the reveal/exposure videos? Perhaps Sergey would be a good one to appeal to. Does he understand this is harmful to magicians, both professional and amateur, magical creators, authors and editors, producers of videos, the art of magic, and arguably even the audiences or potential audiences who love or wish to enjoy the mystery of magic? BTW It is not just old tricks that are being exposed. It's newly created ones and new marketed effects, as well.


I did some checking. Anne Wojcicki appears to be Susan's sister.................... ....
I wonder............................

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 24th, 2018, 11:50 pm

Ask Michael Close to ask Penn Jillette to ask Sergey Brin?

It is hard to make direct contact with people like Sergey Brin.

Or maybe we could ask David Ben to ask Allan Slaight to ask Sergey Brin? He is very rich and may have a connection to Sergey Brin. Plus it would fit in with the ethos of the work that Magicana does.

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 24th, 2018, 11:56 pm

Here is another idea.

Why not nominally transfer all the broadcast rights to marketed tricks to a magic charity?

Those rights would not be exploited for commercial reasons. But it would allow that charity to request the removal of videos exposing secrets on YouTube?

A bit like how there are 2-3 giant record companies and 2-3 media companies that often gets stuff pulled from YouTube?

Maybe Murphy's Magic could play this role? As the biggest distributor of magic? A bit like a giant record label protecting the copyright of the bands on their record label?

The cleverest idea so far that I have seen is that one of the magic companies encouraged customers to post up incorrect explanation videos for recently released magic effects. That is sneaky.

Tom Moore
Posts: 444
Joined: February 7th, 2012, 6:45 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Tom Moore » June 25th, 2018, 7:20 am

Surprisingly enough almost every assumption you've made about my career, experience, financial motives, how/why i'm employed and what i spend a very large chunk of my time doing is completely and totally wrong Mark but as you've made it clear you're not interested in behaving like a grownup i'll duck out of the conversation at this point.

Joe - legally there's no such thing as "broadcast rights"; it's a consensual contractual thing rather than being underwritten by any governments laws so each and every case would have to be sued in each and every territory to get binding court orders that a company/individual could then use to get each individual video taken down.

YouTube do have a system for copyright infringement, for rights-holders/producers/broadcasters to have video's taken down and added to a blacklist system that stops them ever being re-uploaded; you have to jump though some hoops with youtube/google but it's not an especially difficult thing to do. At a corporate level we are a recognised rights-holder and we have a fast-track option to get content suspended immediately that infringes our copyrights & i know plenty of other inventors/creatives who use the same system; You might want to draw your own conclusions as to why magic inventors don't use the system more widely - it's almost as if the problem isn't as big or financially devastating as it appears to be to outsiders...
"Ingenious" - Ben Brantley: New York Times

thomasmoorecreative

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 7913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jonathan Townsend » June 25th, 2018, 9:34 am

Mark, this discussion goes back a ways. A decade ago I asked the Wikipedia moderators to consider keeping the "method" discussion of a trick on a separate page from the "effect". I explained the why of it. I suppose I could have argued by way of the lines about boiling goats in their milk being unacceptable ... but they made their position clear. See links from in earlier post above. About that time (2003-4) I had started building prototype book page formats for magic data - pulling the make, do, and say into separate paragraphs and filling the page spacers with amusing nonsense. A couple of artists who make LARP prop texts/scrolls were producing nice nonsense text and art which looked good for page filler. They seemed to like some features in art which would put off some readers here... so it was amusing to see the idea used in a TV show (http://buffy.wikia.com/wiki/Covenant_of ... Holy_Books).

Alexander had a few words for his teacher Aristotle about putting wisdom in books. As did Thamus when asked about writing.
http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/myths/phaedrus.htm

Not to discourage those who wish to hide among smoke and mirrors ... secrets...

It seems the folks who do regular theater have much to teach us about how to get a show produced, working, costume and set building... and the folks I've met in that profession are good about not discussing "how to"... so maybe it's our own problem - and maybe it's a problem we only have inside our little market for "secrets".

Agree, disagree, keep on trucking

PS Please don't dox the heads of those companies - they are already in the middle of some rough negotiations about what searches and data can be made available on their servers. Between "right to be forgotten" and "security" it's looking like a storm.
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 886
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby MagicbyAlfred » June 25th, 2018, 9:56 am

Jonathan T. Wrote: "It seems the folks who do regular theater have much to teach us about how to get a show produced, working, costume and set building... and the folks I've met in that profession are good about not discussing 'how to'... so maybe it's our own problem - and maybe it's a problem we only have inside our little market for 'secrets.' "

I agree there is much to be learned from playwrights, theatrical and film producers and directors - and, for that matter, actors. But unlike theater and film, in magic, the secret lies at the heart, and if that's not beating, then the routine construction, presentation and showmanship, no matter how great, are moot

Bill Mullins
Posts: 4896
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Bill Mullins » June 25th, 2018, 10:22 am

MagicbyAlfred wrote: Curious who might see an ethical issue with YouTube allowing the posting of the reveal/exposure videos?


Laypeople don't -- it's only magicians who do. And so magicians come off looking self-interested when they complain about it, rather than defensive of some generally-recognized principle.

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 7913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jonathan Townsend » June 25th, 2018, 10:53 am

MagicbyAlfred wrote:... in magic, the secret lies at the heart, and if that's not beating, then the routine construction, presentation and showmanship, no matter how great, are moot

So what do we do with literature and videos which fail to reliably communicate that beating heart needed to effect magic for audiences? What of these failed transplants and Damien Hirst installations? What of the books which which put the wrong artist's heart on the wrong work? What do we do with books about hearts which have stopped beating, describing incorrect anatomy and worse? So many shelves of "moot". And so many wish to $ell such.

#LibraryByFrankenstein or #TallTaleHeart
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 886
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby MagicbyAlfred » June 25th, 2018, 12:30 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:
MagicbyAlfred wrote: Curious who might see an ethical issue with YouTube allowing the posting of the reveal/exposure videos?


Laypeople don't -- it's only magicians who do. And so magicians come off looking self-interested when they complain about it, rather than defensive of some generally-recognized principle.


As Performer might say, I don't give a stuff if magicians come off as looking self-interested; everyone in the world, with the possible exception of Mother Teresa (and she's passed on) is self-interested.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 886
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby MagicbyAlfred » June 25th, 2018, 1:07 pm

Jonathan Townsend wrote:
MagicbyAlfred wrote:... in magic, the secret lies at the heart, and if that's not beating, then the routine construction, presentation and showmanship, no matter how great, are moot

So what do we do with literature and videos which fail to reliably communicate that beating heart needed to effect magic for audiences? What of these failed transplants and Damien Hirst installations? What of the books which which put the wrong artist's heart on the wrong work? What do we do with books about hearts which have stopped beating, describing incorrect anatomy and worse? So many shelves of "moot". And so many wish to $ell such.

#LibraryByFrankenstein or #TallTaleHeart


Nothing.

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » June 25th, 2018, 1:34 pm

Nobody can force You Tube to do anything. I recognise that. All we can do is appeal to the nobler motives. Even the biggest companies are made up of individuals not robots. And individuals often respond helpfully and sympathetically. All we can do is respectfully appeal to the nobler motives in a tactful respectful way. We are in the weaker position so all we can do is ask politely.

Jack Shalom
Posts: 629
Joined: February 7th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brooklyn NY

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jack Shalom » June 25th, 2018, 6:18 pm

this issue will literally define magic over the next few decades.


"Define" might be too strong a word, but change, yes. Evolution happens. Punctuated equilibrium. Fact of life.

Technology has caught up to magic. Not the first time, not the last time. That which seemed magical is no longer. No gasps of amazement at ghosts on the stage, or talking tea kettles anymore. Just so, the nature of magical effects will have to change. The change, this time, however, will be unlike any that has occurred before in magic: as some here have mentioned, it will have to do with exploring the conditions that allow the audience to be unconcerned with investigating the "secret."

Much better that than appealing to third parties to save the secrets of magic. That's how the art moves forward.

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 7913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Jonathan Townsend » June 25th, 2018, 6:58 pm

MagicbyAlfred wrote:
Jonathan Townsend wrote:...So what do we do with...

Nothing.

As he said - let the bogons pile up and keep your goodies away from the marketplace unless you're okay with finding them on trivial pursuit cards within days of display/publication.

Magic has its own great filter - an appeal to imagine others as somehow less well informed or less perceptive than oneself.

#JudiciousGreivingMethinks :)
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Joe Mckay
Posts: 1479
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 6:56 am
Favorite Magician: Lubor Fiedler
Location: Durham, England

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Joe Mckay » June 25th, 2018, 7:56 pm

To follow on from what Jack said. That is one of the interesting avenues that Andy is exploring over at The Jerx.

Jack is a fan of Andy's work as well. So I am sure he had Andy in mind when he wrote that.

rpmagicshop
Posts: 25
Joined: March 10th, 2014, 2:03 pm
Favorite Magician: Michael Ammar

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby rpmagicshop » July 1st, 2018, 10:28 am

Hi, I own a Brick and Mortar shop, people that come in do not even have a clue as to how it is done. I have never had a person tell me they saw something on You tube and knew how it was done.
I floor people with a basic sponge ball routine, and even had a professional attorney send me a letter saying how thrilled he was watching some card magic I did for him.
People on you tube are not really hurting magic in my opinion, you have to perfect your technique and it will not matter one bit.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 886
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby MagicbyAlfred » July 1st, 2018, 2:50 pm

How would it not matter one bit if, let's say, one perfected his technique with the ID, but the spectator(s) had already seen an exposure video of it on YouTube?

performer
Posts: 2898
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby performer » July 1st, 2018, 3:00 pm

rpmagicshop wrote:Hi, I own a Brick and Mortar shop, people that come in do not even have a clue as to how it is done. I have never had a person tell me they saw something on You tube and knew how it was done.
I floor people with a basic sponge ball routine, and even had a professional attorney send me a letter saying how thrilled he was watching some card magic I did for him.
People on you tube are not really hurting magic in my opinion, you have to perfect your technique and it will not matter one bit.


Magic shop owners, are second to You Tube, the WORST people to comment on exposure! They expose almost as much as You Tube and they have an agenda. In fact they are the ones who often put exposure videos on You Tube themselves! They don't give a stuff about the art of magic. All they are concerned about is how much money they make. And the more exposure the more popular magic is and thus the more profit they make. It is good for their bank account but not good for the art of magic itself.

I DON'T want magic to be popular! I want it to be SECRET! The less people doing it the better. There are too many awful magicians as it is without adding any more. And too many secrets exposed.

No. I am sorry. The opinions of magic shop owners who will sell anything to anybody is of no importance whatsoever. They have an agenda. And it ain't magic. It is money.

User avatar
Brad Jeffers
Posts: 896
Joined: April 11th, 2008, 5:52 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: You Tube exposure.

Postby Brad Jeffers » July 1st, 2018, 7:57 pm

it's interesting that a magic shop owner would have the opinion concerning exposure of magic secrets that rpmagicshop has.

Every magic catalog I ever owned had something similar to this (from Louis Tannen catalog #10) ...

Important Notice
Please be very careful in your selection of tricks from this catalog as the intrinsic value of any magical effect is in its working and secret. Therefore we cannot exchange or refund money on tricks from this catalog for any reason other than a defect in workmanship.


What Lou Tannen considered the "intrinsic value" of the products he sold is now being given away for free.

He may have been a little concerned with that.

Of course that's only if he perceived it as having a negative effect on his bottom line.


Return to “Buzz”