Signed vs Not signed?

[fridoliina]

Hello everyone!

I see alot of people asking when they hear about a new effect or if they are going to buy a new effect if the coin/card etc can be signed and if it cant i see that alot of people gets dissapointed.

I have never had spectators sign things even when they could becaus i dont think its needed, but since everyone seems to be doing it i tought i would try it out to see if the reactions were different.

The thing i noticed was that when i told spectators to sign a coin/card they got a wierd look on their face and went like, "uhh sign the coin?" and i found the reactions were the same.

So what do you think is it better to have coins signed in effects like coin bends or ACR? do you think its a difference for the spectators? Or is it just magicians who wants effects seem more possible to them or other magicians?

 

[DavidMisner]

Hello everyone!

I see alot of people asking when they hear about a new effect or if they are going to buy a new effect if the coin/card etc can be signed and if it cant i see that alot of people gets dissapointed.

I have never had spectators sign things even when they could becaus i dont think its needed, but since everyone seems to be doing it i tought i would try it out to see if the reactions were different.

The thing i noticed was that when i told spectators to sign a coin/card they got a wierd look on their face and went like, "uhh sign the coin?" and i found the reactions were the same.

So what do you think is it better to have coins signed in effects like coin bends or ACR? do you think its a difference for the spectators? Or is it just magicians who wants effects seem more possible to them or other magicians?

I tend to only have coins signed in performances, with the exception of when I perform Mindbender. If I do a coin bend, then I want the audience to see that the coin that was bent was the same coin that was signed. It completely dissolves the possibility of a switch. For card routines, I don't really have cards signed for 2 reasons.

1) I don't like replacing cards, as I buy when I need instead of keeping a stash.

2) I tried the signatures, but it didn't change my spectator's reactions. The only time I consider having a card signed is when I sense that the spectator is going to give me trouble after the trick.

//David.Misner::

 

[Chicken]

I never sign. It destroys the prop and is the most unnatural thing you could possibly do. There is just not enough motivation.

 

[David.Blanch]

I would never perform a T&R effect if the card couldn't be signed... In my mind it makes the effect alot more convincing.

 

[Big George]

If the specs are pulling you up that the card is a duplicate then signed might be a good idea. If you are not getting this issue then "dont run if your not being chased".
There are of couse routines that need a signed card and its also a nice momento of your magic if you give the signed card to the spec.

Some issues i have found with getting spec to sign cards is that:

1. They cant believe you want them to sign (and defece) a card. Its not a big problem but it does slow down you act while you convince them.

2. While the card is drying you need to fill this space. Sharpies tend to take a good 5 secs to dry. and this seems like ages when you are standing there. I got around this by using a marker called an Edding 400. These dry almost instantly.

G

 

[Mxtt]

The only effect I see a reason for using a signed whatever for is an Anniversary Waltz. Otherwise it's nothing but an unnecessary extra convincer and possible souvenir.

 

[Sergey]

I like effects that can be signed for the fact that it doesn't use a dupe, but sign vs. not sign, it depends the effect, as stated by David, it's better in a tnr to sign the card(plus you are killing the card anyways), to make it more believable, but in a simple Biddle trick there is no point in signing, in penetrations you can if you want to to make it more believable, but it doesn't do that much to the reactions.

 

[copperfield 14]

Few tricks I think need to be signed. For example any torn and restore, ambitious card, etc.

 

[Tally]

the only trick i've used signing is Sinful. And after my spectators say "wow it really was the one i signed." So i guess so do need signing and some dont.

 

[phrozunsun]

it's a little touch i like to add because i let them keep it, and hooefully they'll keep it, and maybe someday see it again and remember me. I still have souvenirs I've signed.

just a tip: buy two identical decks and force your slighty bent cards on them and replace them with ones from the other deck. rotate through the cards you force and you have a deck that's constantly replenished with new cards

 

[arcangeld]

Signing a card,coin,hankerchief,pidgeon,rabbit is just a tool and it acts as a subtle convincer ... definitely would be good to use it.

But that said.. too much of a good thing isn't good.. take cyril takayama for example (He is my favorite btw..) some of his TV shows.. it gets boring cause before he gets on with the effect he ALWAYS asks the spectator to sign... so use in moderation.

 

[fridoliina]

I started to think about this when i was looking for a good coin bend and alot of people did not like some bends becaus the coin could not be signed.

But performers like Banachek, Paul vigil, marc spelman etc has some really good coin bends that they have been using for years, and they are some of the bigest names in magic/mentalism and they are not signed bends. So why should we need it?

 

[discjockey]

Signing seems too suspicious. "Here, I'm going to tear your card up. Here sign it to make sure I dont switch it and use another card. Look, isnt this your card? The same one I used throughout?"

Signing a card is for a lazy magician I think. If I want to do a torn and restored, I should structure the routine so that the spectator never suspects a switch or dupe. Using a signed card eliminates that possibility (in the minds of a spectator), but doesnt force the magician to think about his routine.

I think, that unless the signature has something to do with a trick, we're just being lazy.

 

[CDarklock]

I never do signed cards, because I suck too much to do the tricks right.

Hey, let's be honest, right?

As far as whether you should do signed cards (assuming you don't suck as much as I do), I think it depends on the reveal. If the reveal is trivial when you assume a duplicate card, have the card signed.

The most obvious "trivial with a dupe" tricks are producing the card from a hidden location under your control. An envelope. An orange. Your wallet. All you have to do is stick the three of clubs in there, force the three of clubs, and there's your trick. The rest is gravy. It turns the entire trick into a simple card force any idiot can do with a weekend's practice.

So you have to change it up: produce the card from a visible location, produce the card from a location (ostensibly) not under your control, or mark the card in a way you could not have prepared.

The last option is the easiest. The other two are possible, but take significantly more ingenuity.

 

[scubaboy04]

It is essential to have cards signed during certain tricks, for example, Tommy Wonder's card to box at the end of his ACR. Why? its been sitting there the whole time! in the spectators mind, there would only be one explanation if it wasnt signed, a duplicate. however, you can work around it in some situations. for example, in my card to wallet routine, the wallet is introduced, and a joke involving a 52 on 1 card is made. then, i have them look through the deck for their card, it isnt there and its in my wallet, unsigned. even if it was a duplicate in the wallet, how did it disappear from the deck? the only reason i do this is because of how often i do my card to wallet, i would go thru too many cards if i did. occasionally, if it's a really important spectator, i'll have the card signed, but 99.99% of the time i wont.

 

[adjones]

Certain tricks, yes, it is more powerful for them to be signed. But for the majority of the effects, it's best to keep your Sharpie in your pocket. It's just not necessary.