Well, that's the hard part. As for now, I think we will just have to agree not getting any cash but just getting credits instead. If you see the amount of work Marko has to do compared to those who created and submitted the tricks, there isn't much if any space to split the incomes between Marko and the others. In case there would be space though, if a lot are sold, I think we would use that to keep this website alive (cause it costs quite a bit too). :hm:

Are personal variations on existing tricks not welcomed for this manuscript? For example, my handling on the Chicago Opener is, in my opinion, an improved handling enough to catch magicians off guard for a moment.

Sure! I approve :) All variations are welcomed :D

Hey Marko, would you be taking your own pictures to add in the manuscript or would the pictures be directly from the video? Just wondering because then I have to also take into consideration the quality of the vids.

He will take them himself. :)

As Mark said, I am going ask a freind who studies photography to take the pictures. He has one of those uber quality cameras with 100 pixels xD

Make that 10 million pixels. :p

i think, that the reward for magicians who contribute to the ebook is just the credit and the ebook itself when it comes out, we aren't pros( well, most of us aren't), so we shouldn't be getting money for such simple things i think.

This is actually a great way to promote your self to the world. For all kind of artists! Oh and also I would like to finish this book by the end of AUGUST, I need to do first eliminations then I have to write the Book contents then the content itself then the pictures,then the spell check, so please hurry it is a lot of work! Hope you understand! :D I want this to turn out the way I planned it thats why I'm rushing you guys! :D

But please don't rush it too badly. Quality is the most important. ;)

I will most likely buy the volumes that come out but contriute to them I am not so sure (hehe I'm a selfish magician)

I agree with la0o9 on this. It's certainly a nice idea, so to have your effect published and then be credited for it should be an honour in itself. If you think about it, there's no way you could recieve any cash at this early stage because this book is not exactly going to be a Best Seller. Mark's right: this site must cost some money to keep running - proceeds should go to that. This stuff is underground. We're not professionals, we are artists.

I would quite like to take part only I don't have any original effects. Oh well. Good luck Marko, I hope you end up with a nice looking product.

Will sleights be in the manuscript as well? Cause if so I have a sleight that I think is original.

Depends on what kind of sleight it is. Try to make a routine using that sleight,regards - Marko Viner

It's a continuation from the Elmsley count. So you can do the elmsley, then do the count i came up with, then do the elmsley again.

Although that doesn't sound any original (I'm sorry), my main concern actually is.. why showing the cards 2, 3 or countless amounts of times without anything happening? :shy:

So you can get point across, like you do the elmsley count, then the card you're hiding is on the bottom. You can do the other count to further prove that its either gone or turned itself over or whatever

sorry but... it kinda seems redundant to do that... why go out of your way to prove something while they already believe it?If your Emsley can't already convince them, it would simply mean you need more practice or that they don't want to believe it.

I like the sound of a new false-count sleight to play with. I also agree with la0o9, that if you have already done a good elmsley count then you have effectively shown the spectator how many cards there are.. You don't need to do it again, since the spectators can count and won't need to count twice if the elmsley has been done well. If you push the point any more then they may well get suspicious and wonder why you keep having to prove how many there are.

Its a little like getting out your gaffed wallet and saying "here's my wallet, it's normal, and there's nothing to see here, look it has no secret flaps". Spectators don't know magic wallets exist.. so don't even mention the wallet just get on with loading the card into it magically! Similarly, if you've just counted with an elmsley, you've done your job and I see no need to do another count as an "added convincer".

I think the false count idea sounds good, but try to come up with an effect to use it in.