If you video your performance of a magic trick, you ought to be honest. This particular performance is lying. I will tell you how and why.
Derek Dingle is an entertainment magician and magic innovator who dreams up remarkable feats. Some of them take quite a bit of practice, and hardly cater to beginners and lazy performers. His Optical Ace Assembly is an excellent magical effect with playing cards, that falls into this category.
The YouTube user Tadashi Akimoto (tad00914) has created a video of himself performing that routine superbly. According to himself, quoting one of his YouTube comments, he spent 7 hours to shoot and edit this. He says, "I don't know why I needed such a long hours."
Well, I do. You needed that much time because your edit is lying to us.
You want to watch it yourself before continuing my review:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgAFTqLY5AE
Did you catch the editing mistakes? I only caught them because I set out to reconstruct this particular effect, due to its remarkable convincers.
Let me guide you through the video and show the editing lies I have spotted. Maybe I missed some.
0:17 - 0:19 The card on the bottom is a low-value club. Maybe a 2 or a 3. Remember this for later.
0:20 Count the fingers on the hand holding the cards. Why is the pinky missing? Us card magicians know why. When did the performer have time to put his pinky in that position? He didn't: that moment was cut out using video editing.
0:22 The point of the ace of hearts is pointing towards us. Remember this for later.
0:24 - 0:25 Now the bottom card is the 9 of clubs. No magical move was made or intended: only a continuity error in editing allows for the switch from the 3 of clubs to the 9.
0:31 The point of the ace of hearts is pointing away from us and to the magician. This is not a result of an editing mistake, but reveals a secret magic move. Of course, this should not have happened, and shows sloppy preparation by the performer. In my Inner Sanctum I will post a reconstruction of this same effect, explaining what secret method is revealed.
0:51 Watch the 12 cards the performer counts out. There is 1 particular card to see: the jack of spades.
1:05 The performer shows that he changed the colour of the backs of the aces to red. This is not a continuity error nor an editing lie: this is the result of a secret magic move.
1:32 Watch the performer count off the 10 of hearts. Remember this for later.
1:33 See that the top card on the ace of clubs has a blue back. Later we will recognise a lie about that blue-backed card.
1:38 Wait, did you see that 10 of hearts again? I did. That also isn't an editing lie, but the result of a secret magic move.
1:50 Pay attention to all the card faces. Watch for the jack of spades, which we saw after 0:51.
2:21 Did you see the jack of spades? I didn't. Which means that if it still in the deck, it now should be among the cards on top of the ace of clubs. Watch carefully and note the order in which the aces appear.
2:29 We saw all 4 aces, as predicted by the performer. No jack of spades visible: it could be hidden behind the ace of diamonds, as a 5th card, which indicates a secret magic move, which I will explain in my reconstruction of this effect in my Inner Sanctum Library of Magic Secrets.
2:33 An editing cut moves the camera angle from up-front to the left diagonal. Help me count the cards.
2:40 The aces appear in a different order! And any evidence of a 5th card seems missing. The performer's card count seems entirely real and convincing. That shouldn't be the case: if a 5th card were present, this camera angle should reveal a secret magical card count, and it's close-up enough to reveal any doubled-up or held-back cards. I found no evidence of any of that. Unfortunately that doesn't mean this performer is smarter than me or knows a secret move I don't know: it probably means he re-performed that last bit without the blue-backed card. That is an outright, intentional lie.
If you are going to video your performance, editing lies into the final production is a good way to prevent analysts like me from reconstructing the effect. However, it also shows that evidently you were unable to make the effect seem as convincing as you would like.
And that is just sad.
The YouTube user Tadashi Akimoto (tad00914) has created a video of himself performing that routine superbly. According to himself, quoting one of his YouTube comments, he spent 7 hours to shoot and edit this. He says, "I don't know why I needed such a long hours."
Well, I do. You needed that much time because your edit is lying to us.
Here's the link to the video.
You want to watch it yourself before continuing my review:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgAFTqLY5AE
Welcome back!
Did you catch the editing mistakes? I only caught them because I set out to reconstruct this particular effect, due to its remarkable convincers.
Let me guide you through the video and show the editing lies I have spotted. Maybe I missed some.
0:17 - 0:19 The card on the bottom is a low-value club. Maybe a 2 or a 3. Remember this for later.
0:20 Count the fingers on the hand holding the cards. Why is the pinky missing? Us card magicians know why. When did the performer have time to put his pinky in that position? He didn't: that moment was cut out using video editing.
0:22 The point of the ace of hearts is pointing towards us. Remember this for later.
0:24 - 0:25 Now the bottom card is the 9 of clubs. No magical move was made or intended: only a continuity error in editing allows for the switch from the 3 of clubs to the 9.
0:31 The point of the ace of hearts is pointing away from us and to the magician. This is not a result of an editing mistake, but reveals a secret magic move. Of course, this should not have happened, and shows sloppy preparation by the performer. In my Inner Sanctum I will post a reconstruction of this same effect, explaining what secret method is revealed.
0:51 Watch the 12 cards the performer counts out. There is 1 particular card to see: the jack of spades.
1:05 The performer shows that he changed the colour of the backs of the aces to red. This is not a continuity error nor an editing lie: this is the result of a secret magic move.
1:32 Watch the performer count off the 10 of hearts. Remember this for later.
1:33 See that the top card on the ace of clubs has a blue back. Later we will recognise a lie about that blue-backed card.
1:38 Wait, did you see that 10 of hearts again? I did. That also isn't an editing lie, but the result of a secret magic move.
1:50 Pay attention to all the card faces. Watch for the jack of spades, which we saw after 0:51.
2:21 Did you see the jack of spades? I didn't. Which means that if it still in the deck, it now should be among the cards on top of the ace of clubs. Watch carefully and note the order in which the aces appear.
2:29 We saw all 4 aces, as predicted by the performer. No jack of spades visible: it could be hidden behind the ace of diamonds, as a 5th card, which indicates a secret magic move, which I will explain in my reconstruction of this effect in my Inner Sanctum Library of Magic Secrets.
2:33 An editing cut moves the camera angle from up-front to the left diagonal. Help me count the cards.
2:40 The aces appear in a different order! And any evidence of a 5th card seems missing. The performer's card count seems entirely real and convincing. That shouldn't be the case: if a 5th card were present, this camera angle should reveal a secret magical card count, and it's close-up enough to reveal any doubled-up or held-back cards. I found no evidence of any of that. Unfortunately that doesn't mean this performer is smarter than me or knows a secret move I don't know: it probably means he re-performed that last bit without the blue-backed card. That is an outright, intentional lie.
Conclusion
If you are going to video your performance, editing lies into the final production is a good way to prevent analysts like me from reconstructing the effect. However, it also shows that evidently you were unable to make the effect seem as convincing as you would like.
And that is just sad.
Wouldn't you like your events to make a lasting impression?
Send in this contact form, or mail me at emanuel.chester@protonmail.com.
