[I AM] A MAGICIAN lll Nikon D7000 Video Test

[KGaborMagic]

Thanks guys!
Mark, I'm NOT a cardist
The reason we put a lot more flourishing than magic in the vid is because quality and editing were on the first place. I think you all agree that flourishes are much more spectacular for the eye than magic routines (Although I did some visual quick magic sleights).
And yeah, I got a lot of positive feedback for the biker-gloves, so I guess you will see them more (Sorry Fin).

[Fin]

No worries dude, I can live with the gloves. It wasn't a major problem but they just felt a little out of place for me, still no big deal

Originally Posted by KGaborMagic

Thanks guys!
I think you all agree that flourishes are much more spectacular for the eye than magic routines

No I certainly do not agree with that. I don't think flourishes are more "spectacular" for the eye than magic routines at all. After seeing a few flourishes I completely lose interest, just as watching juggling is only satisfying for a while, and before long it becomes quite repetitive for me as a spectator, and my audience agrees (yes I have asked them); they have sometimes mentioned the flourishes were cool but the magic is much more interesting since it involves THEM, rather than it just being a case of them watching me show off with cards! Nobody asks "how the hell did you do that flourish", but they constantly ask "how the hell did you do that! [piece of magic]". I'm sure for the performer who can appreciate the massive variety of moves and subtle techniques he is using it would seem like there's a lot to look at, but for the average spectator I perform to, one flourish can very much appear like the next. They are just not that interested, and they don't feel involved. Magic routines however can have very different subjects, effects, stories, journeys, outcomes, reactions, ways of involving the spectator, different locations to reproduce cards etc, etc. In this sense I think card magic is incredibly varied and rich as a performance art, whereas flourishing is relatively limited.

Of course, much of this comes down to taste, and if you love flourishing more than magic that is entirely awesome and will no doubt help you to become a wonderfully talented flourisher. I'm only speaking from my perspective, and my audiences see flourishes as a display of skill that can be accomplished with practise. Spectacular? No. Impressive? Of course. But when I do a good piece of magic, where cards change in their hands, or appear in my wallet, or I read their minds after they have merely peeked at a card; that, to them is much closer to "spectacular". The fact that it is meant to be impossible makes them much more impressed at the fact that I achieved it. Flourishes do not get the same reactions for good reason.. They are entirely possible! And as a side note, when flourishes are added to a magic routine, the spectators often think that THAT was the time something fishy was being done, some secret manipulation etc.

The general public do appreciate flourishing and like to watch it, and some of it IS very impressive, don't get me wrong. I have nothing against it and I find much of it very pretty and also admirable from a skill point of view, but if asked to pick between the two and to watch magic or flourishing for 12 hours straight, I know my spec's would choose magic over flourishing any day of the week, simply because of the variety and the fact that they would actually be involved in the process. They would have something to take home afterwards apart from the thought of how cool I looked while juggling my deck in various ways Good magic can give the spectator a truly spectacular experience and something solid to remember that THEY took part in. Flourishing alone does not offer them such a rich experience, not by any stretch of the imagination.