View Cart | View Account | Help
Order by phone: 800-880-2592
Check out our favorite NEW ARRIVALS
Need it fast? Order before 4pm Eastern and your order ships SAME DAY.

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Building to Building levitation
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 1:56 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1784
Ok I know this has been up before and all, but I just watched it on youtube and it made me think about something. What if all these camera tricks that Criss Angel is doing are actually things he really can do, but he is using a camera trick method instead on tv in order to protect the way he does them live? I mean its likely that that magician Criss Angel talked about really did perform a building to building levitation because if he had not of there probably wouldn't be rumors about him doing it, and Copperfield has done an illusion like that, so if Angel had a real method maybe he didn't want to put it on tv and risk it being figured out and opted for a camera trick that appears almost exactly the same.

I know if I had a building to building levitation that I would seriously consider doing a camera trick version if I filmed it because I wouldn't want people to figure it out, and then if they figured it out they would just think it was a camera trick and not real. I would do that because its about what people see, not the method, so if you can do it live as long as they see the same thing on film and you have reason to use camera trickery such as protection of a secret then I don't think thats wrong.

Btw, I still think his levitation was just a camera trick, I just thought about that other possibility though, but I don't think he can levitate from one building to another building.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:42 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Emperor Penguin

Joined: 24 Jun 2006
Posts: 6622
Location: Penguin's Most Feared Intellect
Instead of a camera trick, it could also just be that Criss sucks as a director. If he could reshoot it and have one continous shot, it would be a lot better, but it seems to me that Criss likes taking various camera shots and then peicing them together in a crappy way.

A building to building float wouldn't be that difficult if you had the money. Criss has the money, but who knows if he did use a camera trick. I've never done a building to building float, but I've done levitations similiar on a much smaller scale. Meaning, I've just floated random objects from chair to chair. The method I use, I'm sure could be adapted to a larger scale levitation, however, I'm not completely sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:21 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 225
An intersting theory coolonto. If he has 2 methods (one live one tv) then he might not truely be the hack we all thought.

However, he has performed too many angle sensitive effects for me to agree with this theory outright. Also, this doesn't dismiss his obvious use of stooges.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:32 pm 
User avatar
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 1738
Location: The John Hughes movie fan club.
it was fake if you watch it there are only like 7 people watching him at the time if i was going to float from one building to another i would advertize better and if i faked it hire more people


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:20 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Emperor Penguin

Joined: 24 Jun 2006
Posts: 6622
Location: Penguin's Most Feared Intellect
Well, according to Banachek, they do shoot effects more then once, just so they can get the best film. Also, you have to remember it's for tv. Tv magic is a lot different. Most tv magicians, if not all of them, use hired audiences (not actors, just audiences who will sit there and watch the same effect over and over again. The World's Greatest Magic tv specials, many of Copperfields tv specials, and many other magic tv specials use hired audiences.)

I've also heard that he does an effect similiar to this in his stage show.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:54 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 15 Apr 2006
Posts: 314
Location: look in your trashcan....
The levitation looks fishy to me


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:46 pm 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 28
Well, I see no proof that he uses Camera Tricks on this trick, nor most of his other tricks for that matter. I would like to know the secret if it wasnt a camera trick. And I think it was David Copperfield who levitated across the Grand Canyon, similar to Levitating from Building to Building.

As for stooges, I dont see a problem, as long and not the whole audience is being in on the trick. In a group of like 15 its ok to have 1 to make the trick work. But not all 15 just for the camera.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:48 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1784
Watch the video extremely carefully and really scrutinize every detail and you can find the method he used. Interestingly enough, the method is actually shown a couple of times way off in the background, but its nothing to do with what is making him do it, its just the same thing. I don't want to expose anything, but just watch the video carefully as in the background and the path that he follows and the areas actually shown, and you should figure out how he did it. And it was a camera trick. The camera controlled the viewing angles. The main angle issues were above him and behind or either to the side of the cameras depending on the shots.

Also yeah he uses stooges a lot, and some of his tricks are camera tricks because they are way too angle sensitive to be done without a camera. However, I have to say I wonder if he is not replicating illusions with a camera trick for tv sometimes, but I really think he just uses camera trickery to be using it. Blaine I think did it to protect a secret kind of, but I don't think thats what angel is doing.

And a building to building levitation would be extremely difficult to do without camera trickery or without controlled stage lighting because wire needs to be so much stronger if you are not using it the way it is normally used. I don't want to expose methods, so its kind of hard to explain. Not to mention you would need the proper buildings, and the proper place because you could get in trouble doing something like that in a city in most areas of course. And the biggest thing is safety probably, cause u don't want to die lol.

But of course magicians like Angel and Copperfield do flying/levitating illusions on a major scale in their stage shows, but that is very different than doing a building to building levitation without being able to control your surroundings or have anything over you.

Fallingblood, I agree Angel is probably not a good director, but I think they cut the building to building levitation into many shots intentionally to make it harder to figure it out, because first you have to kind of see whats going on despite the continuous shot changing. That really made the building to building levitation look better I think on tv than if he had shown it in one shot. It would be a little more obvious how it was done then.

So thats my opinion about that stuff.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:14 am 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 12
I know i don't post here a lot, I know I am not a magician (just a hobby), I am sure I don't have the years experince that many of you do. But from what i know when you sit there and bash CA aren't you bashing the whole magic community. You think off all the people that are involved with his show or have been. Banachek, Penn and teller, Amazing Jonathan, the magic castle. And the fact that he won Magician of the year!

When you say he is not a good magician and he is a fake you are calling the whole community as a fake.

I would really like to know how many of you that say he is a hack has been to one of his shows.... because he has said that anything he does on the show he can do on stage. And I am sure he does a lot of stuff on stage that he does in the show. You guys really need to stop using camra edit as an out and if you really want to know how its done go to his show and see if he is such a bad magician. So for now on I feel that unless you have a scanned ticket from one of his shows that you can post you really have no right to say he is a hack or not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:23 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 225
We aren't saying that 'he is a hack so by extension magic is dumb because he represents us all'.

We're saying, 'he's a hack, so we don't want him to represent us'.

This has been discussed on countless forums.

Banachek: He needs to make a living to, and Mindfreak pays him a hefty sum to consult. I would assume that they need Banachek to tell them, -this is way too over the top, no magician will believe you.

Penn and Teller: irrelevant point. Penn is one heck of a shady guy, and they have gained a reputaion for revealing magic to enhance their careers (another reason we don't like Angel).

The Amazing Jonathan: I'm not even going to bother.

Magic Castle: Publicity. The magic castle needs to attract audiences and keep the seats filled just like every other theatre. Angel was a good marketting ploy.

His Magician of the Year Awards: Every award show on the planet is purely political. It has nothing to do with Angel's "accomplishments" or "contributions" to magic (he has made no contributions); what it involves is the fact that he's popular because the laymen at home are too ignorant to see through his trash.

The fact is bangler, many of the methods are common knowlege (among magicians). We know how he did it, and we know that what he claims isn't true.

Myself and other posters have watched the episodes over and over again, we know that the film stopped (was altered ect.) because we know what we're looking for (if we know how it should look, we know what's wrong with the picure).

I think you're mis-understanding (not to be rude) stems from your status as a 'hobbyist'. I mean no disrespect by this, but I've noticed a trend in the community.

Most self-described 'hobbyists' like Angel (as a generality), most veterans don't (again generality). Why?

The veterans have put hundreds if not thousands of hours into making their magic work in the real world. Suddenly, a punk with a camera crew, a pause button, and some hired spectators shows up and becomes an overnight sensation. You (the veteran) know that in a few months people will figure out that this guy is editing, buying people off, and lying through his teeth. When that happens, magic will take a huge hit, effecting the entire magic community.

The 'hobbyists' haven't put hundreds of hours into mastering the art. They don't understand what it's like to spend weeks or months creating this masrterpiece and have another guy go Xerox it and sell it for millions. Many 'hobbyists' have said (on these forums), "I know he uses stooges and camera tricks, whats wrong with that?"

You guys really need to stop using camra edit as an out and if you really want to know how its done go to his show and see if he is such a bad magician
The thing is, we do know how it's done.
Also, performing the effects he does in the show wouldn't be hard on stage. The stage is a controlled environment, on which you can make ANYTHING happen. The problem arises when you go into a street setting, and claim you can do the same stuff.

So for now on I feel that unless you have a scanned ticket from one of his shows that you can post you really have no right to say he is a hack or not.
I feel that you need to have more experience and infomation before you can have an opinion at all. FYI: again, the stage isn't the question. I've seen clips of his stage show and it looks very well produced. That doesn't change the fact that he can't do that stuff on the street. Stage=controlled=limitless capability
Street=uncontrolled=limitations
However
Street+camera editting+stooges=limitless capability

P.S. I would establish more credibility before I started making demands if I where you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:10 pm 
Offline
born to perform.

Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1784
Jonathan I agree with you.

"You guys really need to stop using camra edit as an out and if you really want to know how its done go to his show and see if he is such a bad magician."

Bangler you are right that some people who post on here do sadly use editing/camera trickery as an excuse for effects they don't know how to do, which are usually the people who think Angel is using cameras like 40% or more of the time on his show, which is really absurd and ridiculous. However, the working magicians on here or more expoerienced magicians know how the majority of his illusions work, and therefore know if it is a camera trick or not.

An example would be his building to building levitation. I watched that and looked for things that I thought would be possible methods and guess what, I found one so I know how he did it. It is very clear to me how it was done because of a couple of things. One is the path he took through the air, the other is the viewing angles. Those two things really, really make me believe that I am right about the method that I think he used. And if I am right, and I feel very sure that I am, then it is indeed a camera trick.

Now do you want to know why this building to building effect CANNOT be replicated on stage?


On stage you are inside the building, so you can't exactly levitate from the top of one building to another one indoors. And even if you had to large platforms with a gap inbetween, it is not the same because there is a roof over you. Floating around (even over the audience and stuff) in a stage show is not the same as a building to building levitation. That effect CANNOT be replicated in a stage show. It is only something that could be done in an outdoor stageshow, or as a street type effect. That is, if you have a method to do it. And I doubt that Angel does, at least not exactly what was shown on television.

So that is why we feel some of the illusions are camera edits/ camera trickery, and why they CANNOT be replicated in his stage show. If the illusions were replicated in his stage show it is a stage illusion, meaning the illusion is completely different from what would be done on the side of a street.


"But from what I know when you sit there and bash CA aren't you bashing the whole magic community. You think off all the people that are involved with his show or have been. Banachek, Penn and teller, Amazing Jonathan, the magic castle. And the fact that he won Magician of the year!"


No when we say we think Criss Angel's use of camera edits/trickery is ridiculous, that is not saying the whole magic community is ridiculous. That would be like saying "When you eat a cheeseburger, aren't you eating the whole cow?" No, you are only eating part of the cow lol. So if someone bashes Angel because they're sick of seeing camera tricks and edits or they bash the camera tricks and edits they are NOT bashing all of us.

And having consultants doesn't mean anything. They have little to do with the material he chooses to perform. Their job is to HELP and PROVIDE material. Angel is the person who ultimately decides to do an edit or trick the camera. I feel certain some of the people consulting advise him not to do that, and some probably encourage it because some of them like Penn and Teller do it as well. But it is ANGEL'S DECISION.

And he won magician of the year probably because of his show and being famous and stuff like that. Usually a magician wins that award because of an outstanding routine or trick or something in their show, such as Jeff McBride's mask routine, but Angel's show lacks any piece he can call his own, something that makes his show truly unique and different from other magicians. I have not seen any illusion performed by him that another magician has not done something similar to, or a manipulation routine by him that no other magician can replicate. So it doesn't really seem like there was any reason for him to be magician of the year other than his show and fame.


"So for now on I feel that unless you have a scanned ticket from one of his shows that you can post you really have no right to say he is a hack or not."

I've already explained why his stage show is irrelevant here. But until you are a magician equal in knowledge to the more experienced magicians on here, I feel that you have no right to post about him being talented or not. Because you really don't know.



Just for the record though, his stage show is good, but thats totally irrelevant when talking about his show Mindfreak because he is not doing the same illusions that he does in his stage show, and if he was that would be a bit disapointing with him doing the same things for two different shows.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:41 pm 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 118
..and its in the middle of no where!! it would have been cooler if he did it in the city of las vegas. not outside on the outskirts of las vegas.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:59 pm 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 49
well, in his next season, he will be levitating on top of the Luxor in plain view for all to see, no camera tricks.

I see exactly what you are saying though Justin, this would be just like David Blaine's balducci. You have two different methods, one to show in real life situations and one to show for t.v so noone figures it out by hitting rewind a thousand times. I personally dont care about this levitation because it just didnt seem magical to me due to the very poor camera work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:53 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 225
SirLurch wrote:
well, in his next season, he will be levitating on top of the Luxor in plain view for all to see, no camera tricks.

I see exactly what you are saying though Justin, this would be just like David Blaine's balducci. You have two different methods, one to show in real life situations and one to show for t.v so noone figures it out by hitting rewind a thousand times. I personally dont care about this levitation because it just didnt seem magical to me due to the very poor camera work.


Sure. No camera tricks. They said the same thing about the building to building. I'll believe it when I see it.

To make a comment: guys like myself and coolonto, we are the ones who want to believe it's for real. That there really is a method. We wish there was a method, because then, we could do it too.

That's part of what ticks me off about Angel. Camera tricks and stooges are not only a replacement for skill, they are the ultimate display vanity. It's the magician's attempt to say, "I'm better than all of you" to every other magician. If there was a method to do this stuff, I'll be the first person to vote Angel as the new GREATEST MAGICIAN IN HISTORY, but the problem is, there isn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:05 am 
Offline
Penguin

Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 49
I also stated that he will be doing the luxor float in front of all of vegas, how can he possibly make it a camera trick. thousands will be watching, and it would be highly unlikely that he could keep that many people quiet.

I also want to believe that what he does is real, so untill I get some proof that they aren't I wont believe they are camera tricks.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2009 Penguin Magic, Inc.