[手法]請問劉謙用的Sybil是什麼版本 [復制鏈接]

哈哈
火藥味好濃
不過我已經點醒了

任何經過修飾的基本動作
就叫做ｆｌｏｕｒｉｓｈ
普通動作做的跟一般人不一樣就算吧？

那我想問一下,小時候看到的切牌(普通人)都是分在桌上
後來自己玩魔術學了swing cut 那這種該不會就已經就flourish了吧＝ ＝？

我覺得flourish是對魔術的一種包裝，增加視覺效果

應該沒有那麼複雜的定義

引用第17樓deathlee于2010-10-27 08:21發表的 回 15樓(poonchingyip) 的帖子 :
NONO
我在跟你解釋Flourish是怎麼來的
是現代你所看到的Floursih已經經過不知道多少次的修飾、演變以後才這樣
想想Dan & Dave兄弟所在Trilogy所發表的花式他們都已經練習八年以上
.......

For me, you are just based on the theory that "Flourish can be any kind of action or movement" to make your assumption out. You are including some sleights that you think those should be part of flourishes while the original purpose is to make some part more magicial.

The action that makes something/process look good is flourish? Make something looks and make something for flourishing are totally different from each other. Although both of them are trying to achieve the goal ----- beautiful, cooler and more artistic, there are more meanings at the back.

After making something more beautiful, that movement can be considered as flourish. Yes, you may be right; HOWEVER, that is based on your perspective to consider it as "flourish" while it may not/ should not be considered as what you look like.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION, you are trying to argue that flourish has certain point of importance in magic performance. Unfortunately, it is not the same that it HAS TO BE in magic performance. MOREOVER, you are only based on your perspective "any movement that makes something looks beautiful is flourish" to argue that flourish in magic performance in important while you CANNOT see the hidden meaning at the back. Magic performance is a visual art. Make the act more beautiful and magical is something NECESSARY. In this part, adding flourishes may enhance the presentation. At the same time, it does not mean that has to be at there because there are other things that can do the same job while it does not consider as "flourish". Presentiaton is always the first thing to achieve in a magic performance. For your point that "any movement can be considered as flourish", please start a pose at "Magic Cafe" and see how people react instead of base on your personal perspective/opinion/imagination to make the conclusion.



P.S. BY THE WAY, if you dont think that "flourish" is 花式切牌; then what should it be? During the DAN AND DAVE CHINESE LECTURE that my team held in Toronoto, they explained the term "flourish" once in front of me already. I am wondering how you are going to explain the term "flourish".

可能是語言的關係

甚麼是Flourish?   你應該要從1990年開始
Flourish是甚麼?   他是一種經過修飾且華麗的動作
如修辭一般，寫同一件事情，但是有不同的寫法，且也有所謂的漂亮寫法
那為什麼你現在所認為的Flourish與我所說的不同?
因為我們討論的基準跟本不同
我在說Flourish從以前到現在他的本意，而你在講現在演變的結果
兩個是完全不同的東西，所以這樣討論很沒意義

甚麼叫做華麗的?   他是形容詞，當有新東西比原本的東西還要華麗，那他就會是"華麗的"
如同101大樓比高一樣
你會說，我家住很高，我家五樓，因為沒有電梯，所以五樓很高
你可能也會說，我家很高，住20樓，因為同學都住透天
但還有更高的101，看你比較的基準是甚麼而已

所以Flourish是甚麼?    
你說的是他現代的產物
我說的是他長久以來只為了讓動作變華麗的精隨
這也是Flourish 與 XCM最大的不同(當然還有XCM不包含魔術)他們追求的目標不一樣

所以由於我們爭論的點不一樣
在爭論下去也只是無意義而已

動作華麗在魔術中表演重不重要?  
這是表演者自己回答就好
但至少我看到不少魔術表演者要使自己服裝華麗的例子
或許是服裝華麗最能有成效吧
但我確性不論是甚麼方面華麗
對觀眾來說都是有影響的

基於以上
再加上你最初的發言是不論快或慢對觀眾都沒有影響
我才出來討論，這是會讓人誤解的
因為你只有提到快慢，沒有提到流暢，會使一些人認為慢就是不流暢
因為我也確實見過這種人

Magic 魔術，任何超越常理不可思議的事物都可以視為魔術，只是看他表現的手法如何
XCM  Extreme Card Manipulation 極限撲克牌手法，顧名思義，要夠極限才行...  哈哈
Flourish 他不過就是花式而已，如果花式裡面只有切牌，那開扇都別玩了

最後，我所謂"任何小動作都可以算是是花式"
是指任何動作只要你想到有辦法使他更華麗，他就可以算是花式
因為動作目標不變，但是動作過程改變
我前面那句話是以目標來說
請你不要真的以為所有動作都是花式...

PS 我知道為什麼DD他們做龍捲風切牌，你上網查查所有人做這招的感覺，你就會懂我所說甚麼叫做"華麗的精隨"


=========再補充==========

flourish   /ˈflʌrɪʃ/ DJ   /ˈflɜːrɪʃ/ DJ US   /'flɝɪʃ/ KK US
verb
to develop quickly and be successful or common 繁榮；昌盛；興旺 V
See also: thrive Synonym
to grow well; to be healthy and happy thrive 茁壯成長；健康幸福 V
to wave something around in a way that makes people look at it （為引起注意）揮舞 VN written
noun
an exaggerated movement that you make when you want somebody to notice you （為引起注意的）誇張動作 usually singular
an impressive act or way of doing something 給人深刻印象的行動；令人難忘的方式 usually singular
details and decoration that are used in speech or writing （講話或文章的）華麗辭藻，修飾
a curved line, that is used as decoration, especially in writing （尤指手寫體的）裝飾曲線；花彩字
a loud short piece of music, that is usually played to announce an important person or event 花彩號聲 usually singular

這個字與101高度一樣
如果今天台北有六成的房子都與101高度差不多
那你就不會特別提101很高

Flourish 花式也是這樣
若今天連路人都做得出來"Pandora" (當然不可以趁我走在路上的時候)
那大眾也會認為Pandora是很常見的，而不認為他是"花式"

但其實花式的本意不是這樣
做事情如果忽略的本意，那你在進行那件事情的時候
就需要比別人更努力些

我想所謂"魔術"本意在這邊懂的人絕對比我了解的還多
所以我想就不用多做說明了

勝負已經很明顯了
樓上大大說的好啊

樓樓上大大+1

我現在感觸更深了

觀眾群分三種

魔術師

常看魔術的麻瓜

看很少的麻瓜
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
以魔術師

知道秘密了

但會覺得你動作很漂亮,而且有種"新鮮的感覺"


常看魔術的麻瓜

會覺得你有下過功夫


少看魔術的麻瓜

其實注意力比較集中在效果

基本四切,和高難度切牌

在一開始是並不會有什麼差別的,因為他們"從沒見過"

所以我非常認同

"觀眾的口味是被養大"這句話還有"觀眾會拿來比較"這件事情
=================================================
什麼叫做花式

就是修飾吧,那有沒有達到修飾效果的改變或進步

真的因人而異XD

簡單舉個例子把

An Ha Lim出牌程序的檢查,目標都一樣,
不過在把手甩來甩去,換來換去
就有增加華麗又流暢的感覺

樓上兩位別爭持了
辯論flourish, XCM, cardistry 的定義實在沒甚麼意思。

poonchingyip把花式和魔術分開談，JL卻把flourish詮釋得像是形容詞。（大概這個意思吧）
其實對「flourish」的詮釋彈性可以很大，像poonchingyip和JL的爭論以前也是T11的月經文，不過現在這種爭論已經幾乎絕跡了，因為大家都發覺沒甚麼好吵的。

我都同意表演魔術上，把牌控得好一些是一種eye-candy，例如一個乾淨利落的bridge suffle已經是一個flourishy move。

不同的花切對laymen而言都大同小異，他們會比較impress的地方是空中動作（拋接、spring牌之類的）和多packet的display.
雖然6000的sybil很慢和不暢順，始終重點不在那裡，而且對象是laymen，我覺得沒甚麼問題。
只是花切有那麼多種，因為看了6000的而想學的話只能說是明星效應了。

flourish是對魔術的一種包裝，但不會增加魔術的神奇度，如何揉合得不好，甚至會把魔術毀了，建議謹慎使用。

Then it is your problem to make the assumption that I did not care of "smoothness". I am only based on the original post whether it should be done in fast or slow to answer the question, and then you start your own point of view. You think I am the kind of person that you usually see WITHOUT asking properly, who can you blame?

YA, we are discussing on different issues. While I am trying to help the questioner, you are trying to pick pick my mistakes that I am not even talking about that category.

You said that "請你不要真的以為所有動作都是花式"~ HOWEVER, I keep asking you this over and over and you didn't give me your final answer. What do you expect me to observe? "even open a card box can be considered as flourish" ---- that's what you have said. I asked you "even pick a card" this action is flourish, you didn't answer until now.What do you expect me to understand?

You keep proving the point 華麗 while you are even on the subject. What can I say?

I respect you that you are trying to prove how important of the smoothness in flourishes b/c I am also doing flourishes. HOWEVER, you are not right on the subject I am talking from the very beginning.