http://prntscr.com/1wausxThis picture was on Ellusionist's Facebook page. What are your thoughts? Are you going to buy this? Let me know I want to get as much info on this as I can.
Last edited by a moderator:
Template errors
- Template public:font_awesome_setup: [E_USER_WARNING] Template public:font_awesome_setup is unknown (src/XF/Template/Templater.php:781)
- Template public:page_style: [E_WARNING] A non-numeric value encountered (/srv/private/xenforo/internal_data/code_cache/templates/l1/s8/public/page_style.php:101)
- Template public:page_style: [E_WARNING] A non-numeric value encountered (/srv/private/xenforo/internal_data/code_cache/templates/l1/s8/public/page_style.php:155)
- Template public:uix_config: [E_WARNING] A non-numeric value encountered (/srv/private/xenforo/internal_data/code_cache/templates/l1/s8/public/uix_config.php:31)
- Template public:uix_config: [E_WARNING] A non-numeric value encountered (/srv/private/xenforo/internal_data/code_cache/templates/l1/s8/public/uix_config.php:32)
Gaff System
- Thread starter CIassic
- Start date
Mods - If this isn't cool just delete it - http://www.ellusionist.com/gaff-system-madison-morelli-jones.html
This is all of the information that has been released thus far.
This is all of the information that has been released thus far.
As somebody who is not very fond of gaff decks or trick decks at all for that matter, I find this very interesting from three of three of the most innovative magicians in the industry today, I feel once I see more content we can all make our decision. With that being said, they have my attention with this gaff system, most companies don't hype effects this much, and for there to be a whole page dedicated to this with a countdown clock and a trailer with details on there probably means that this is going to be the best gaff deck on the market. But that is for us to decide, let's see!
I hear that Ricky Jay uses gaffs. Dai Vernon used gaffs. Other great magicians use/used gaffs. Shocking I know. Great magicians using a gaff. I never understood the people saying they are not fond of gaffs. ID is a gaff. McDonald's Aces is a gaff. There is so much great magic out there that is gaffed and not doing it because who know why lacks logic.
I have two reasons for not using gaff cards -
1 - I don't generally feel the tricks done with gaffs suit my style. There are very few presentations I've seen of gaff card tricks where I was really hooked by it. There's been some, yes, but not many.
2 - I don't want to manage them. I hate having packed pockets. I work with as few gimmicks as possible so that I can have as little as possible in each pocket. At my most loaded down I might carry 5 things, gimmicks included. I just don't like to deal with it all.
That's not to say there's not good gaff tricks out there. There are. They just aren't for me, for the most part.
1 - I don't generally feel the tricks done with gaffs suit my style. There are very few presentations I've seen of gaff card tricks where I was really hooked by it. There's been some, yes, but not many.
2 - I don't want to manage them. I hate having packed pockets. I work with as few gimmicks as possible so that I can have as little as possible in each pocket. At my most loaded down I might carry 5 things, gimmicks included. I just don't like to deal with it all.
That's not to say there's not good gaff tricks out there. There are. They just aren't for me, for the most part.
So this would be there 3rd Gaff system? I think the first was Army of 52 with Justin Miller, then after that was Ultra-Gaff with Wayne Houchin and Daniel Garcia.
Personally, I have nothing against gaffs/gimmicks. I don't like to carry them on me, just because I prefer to have my pockets looking next to empty or completely flat (thus getting rid of the notion that Magicians tend to carry around a ton of crap on them.) Plus pocket management can be a pain in the ass if you are trying to remember which pocket has what gaff or deck in it.
Personally, I have nothing against gaffs/gimmicks. I don't like to carry them on me, just because I prefer to have my pockets looking next to empty or completely flat (thus getting rid of the notion that Magicians tend to carry around a ton of crap on them.) Plus pocket management can be a pain in the ass if you are trying to remember which pocket has what gaff or deck in it.
I do like how they're choosing to present this new gaff system as different from the others. One of my biggest problems with typical gaffed card tricks is that they just feel fake, if that makes any sense. I remember using gaff decks constantly when I was younger and I remember the reactions were always mixed because of the "trick cards" explanation. Maybe Calen, Eric and Daniel will have a new take on the subject, something that I'd actually use. I'd have to see them before I really made a decision. I'm not a big fan of the fact that it seems that Artifice is the only deck that's going to get gaffed. I would have preferred a slightly more common deck, but that's just my opinion.
Here's a thought. . . DON'T BUY IT IF IT UPSETS YOU.
Better yet, learning something that a.) isn't another bloody card trick; b.) actually requires skill and TALENT and in so doing, be able to contrast yourself against the kids using such a device. Show the world how hours of knuckle busting delivers a better quality and sense of freedom than relying on a gimmick.
More than the device I loathed the long, never ending patting one another on the back "scripting" that fills the bulk of the video; if these egos would allow action to speak for them rather than B.S. and self-promotion they may see a stronger commercial reception. I know that fertilizer makes things grow but too much of it can burn up the crop and consume it before it manages to take root. I fear that's the case with this video.
Better yet, learning something that a.) isn't another bloody card trick; b.) actually requires skill and TALENT and in so doing, be able to contrast yourself against the kids using such a device. Show the world how hours of knuckle busting delivers a better quality and sense of freedom than relying on a gimmick.
More than the device I loathed the long, never ending patting one another on the back "scripting" that fills the bulk of the video; if these egos would allow action to speak for them rather than B.S. and self-promotion they may see a stronger commercial reception. I know that fertilizer makes things grow but too much of it can burn up the crop and consume it before it manages to take root. I fear that's the case with this video.
I don't understand why you think we have to think about this the same way you do.
There's two points here that I'm really finding to grind on me. The first being that because you find certain tricks to be magical, obviously we must also find those to be magical. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Most performances I see using cards (as much as I genuinely enjoy card magic and cards in general) seem like tricks to me. Not magic - tricks. The second being that because you find them to be powerful you seem to expect us to want to perform them. Nope. Card tricks in general do not fit my style. I could shoehorn them in, sure, but it would be forced and unnatural. I'm pushing a new solo show next year - I will be doing one card trick out of 45 minutes and that is purely to break up the seriousness of the rest of the show.
Don't fall into the trap of assuming that everything you think is what everyone else should be thinking.
I'm sorry, Craig, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on pretty much this entire post. First off - Morelli, Jones and Madison are doing quite well on the commercial market. Everything Madison puts out sells out. His thinking regarding tricks and effects is sideways to most of us and in the current market really hits home. Jones is very well respected and his Metal series is one of the best primers of coin work I've ever seen (Good enough to make me consider learning coins better even though I never perform with them). From what I understand Morelli got recruited to Copperfield's team more or less purely due to a YouTube series he was doing where he invented a new trick every day. Action has spoken for them - It's paid their bills for years now. Given their reputations and the current desire for a gaff card deck that's usable (Since the USPCC changed policies and prevent many existing gaff deck designs from being printed) - I predict that this will sell very well at least initially.
The second point I strongly disagree with is one I'm surprised to hear from you, Craig. Using a gaff does not imply that someone has no talent and doing something that's difficult to do does not automatically make it better. This attitude surprises me coming from you, as so often you've talked about how much acting and performance ability goes into making a big box illusion really magical. The same applies to gaff cards. One cannot assume the card will do all the work, just as one cannot assume that the Big Box will do all the work, just as one cannot assume that a difficult sleight will be entertaining. The method is irrelevant as long as it works.
Maybe I'm misreading things but there it is.
Those gaffs are practical ideas, generally simple gaffs as well. I'm referring to the heavily modified cards that you'd find in the Ultragaff deck or something. Simple double backers/blank cards etc.. have tons of applications, not trying to deny that.
Christopher. . . needless to say, I'm not a card or close-up guy and I'm certainly far from "current" when it comes to the new Who's Who on the scene. . . I've never heard of these guys and what my judgement was based on was first impression coming from the video in question. Secondly, I am known to emphasize performance/theater, yes! But, I also emphasize the action of NOT being overly reliant on gimmicks and devices; we get too caught up and focused on what such tools allow us to get away with and in so doing we loose our place and stop learning, trusting that special such and such to make the magic happen vs. raw talent.
I've watched Ricky Jay present Assembling Aces using 3 totally different methods in the one seating, including a gimmick! This is how such things should be incorporated; to help us accent/augment and otherwise enhance an effect we are presenting. When we learn to approach our magic, any aspect of magic, in this way THEN we are becoming actual magicians vs. someone that does tricks. THEN we are learning our craft rather than being someone that can't do their act because they don't know what to do when the thread breaks, the bird is dead, etc.
I know what you're getting at on this point; gimmicks allow us to focus on presentation rather than worrying about doing the trick properly. . . buddy, I've watched Vegas headliners screw up a dove pan and it don't get much simpler. I see this "logic" as being a myth we tell ourselves so as to justify the lack of effort on our part, to learn and find more on how to make a given piece happen. And yes, we will find many methods that aren't viable or practical to our cause, but when we find that one or two that work for us, we find the sort of gems that everyone else will extend adoration over. . . we do it all the time.
I hope I've cleared things up in your mind somewhat
I've watched Ricky Jay present Assembling Aces using 3 totally different methods in the one seating, including a gimmick! This is how such things should be incorporated; to help us accent/augment and otherwise enhance an effect we are presenting. When we learn to approach our magic, any aspect of magic, in this way THEN we are becoming actual magicians vs. someone that does tricks. THEN we are learning our craft rather than being someone that can't do their act because they don't know what to do when the thread breaks, the bird is dead, etc.
I know what you're getting at on this point; gimmicks allow us to focus on presentation rather than worrying about doing the trick properly. . . buddy, I've watched Vegas headliners screw up a dove pan and it don't get much simpler. I see this "logic" as being a myth we tell ourselves so as to justify the lack of effort on our part, to learn and find more on how to make a given piece happen. And yes, we will find many methods that aren't viable or practical to our cause, but when we find that one or two that work for us, we find the sort of gems that everyone else will extend adoration over. . . we do it all the time.
I hope I've cleared things up in your mind somewhat
How long before the USPCC decides to can the production because it screws with their back design or the basic design of playing cards? This is essentially what caused a lot of card gimmicks to get canned by them.
I don't used gaffs-not because I don't think they are sweet (some of the best card effects in magic are because of gaffs)- but because I can't afford em! I buy playright playing cards and that's about all I can afford right now. And when I do get some money saved up, I will probably be buying a set of silvers instead of a bunch of gaffed card decks. Amazing tricks, just not in my budget right now.
The USPCC doesn't care about the Artifice line. They care about their own copyrighted material. That's the Joker, the Ace of Spades and the scrollwork back design on the Standards. Custom cards don't fall under their copyrights because they don't own the designs.
So if these are only made for the Artifice cards, then what about the people who use mandolin backs or regular bikes? Are they just ignored or something.