• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Amazing Color Changing Card Trick

LostAngeles

Penultimate Amazing
L
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
10,109
I'm so focused on the fact that the shirts had changed, I missed not only the camera cuts, but the changing of the table and the background.

I did notice the Wookie/gorilla thing watching later on, though...
 
It's a gorilla -a tribute to Dan Simon's gorilla video.

And it's C-O-L-O-U-R :D
 
I was so focused on the cards, I missed everything. The deck switch was easy to spot of course, but that wasn't the point.
 
I was focusing on the cards and only noticed the table cloth changing colors. I saw the gorilla, too, couldn't miss him!
 
I showed it in class ASAP, but at least one student had already seen it! Crikey!

Also found it best to break it into two segments for classroom viewing/discussion. Stop at the end of the trick to ask students how the trick worked, then show them the reveal.

The toughest part with HS kids is that they have no control over their own speech. They are anatomically unable to watch the trick in silence. If they notice a change of shirt color (sorry Teek), a loud announcement of that change spews from their mouths without any conscious effort on their part. They have no inner monologue.
 
I have to admit that I missed everthing including the gorilla.
My son at least saw the gorilla.
 
The interesting thing behind this is that our perceptions are "shaped" by our attentional system. We cant see things if we are not, somehow, expecting to see them.
 
LostAngeles said:
I'm so focused on the fact that the shirts had changed, I missed not only the camera cuts, but the changing of the table and the background.

I did notice the Wookie/gorilla thing watching later on, though...
Click to expand...

Camera cuts? I've just gone back and watched it again, and there were none of those. I had to have the gorilla pointed out to me, though.
 
Gr8wight said:
Camera cuts? I've just gone back and watched it again, and there were none of those. I had to have the gorilla pointed out to me, though.
Click to expand...


When the changes were first revealed (none of which I caught), I thought there had been camera cuts. When the "bigger picture" showed that it was one continuous shot, I realized that I had assumed there were camera cuts.

I'd make one ba-a-a-d witness. But what a great demonstration.
 
On the ABC "Catalyst" series, they once showed five minute scene of a party. At some stage during the party, there was a clear view of a person stealing an object off a table. Afterwards you were shown a line of suspects and you had to pick the person responsible. It seems most people (including myself) picked someone that was at the party but was not the person who stole the object. They then replayed the 5 minute scene to show you that you had, in fact, chosen a person who featured prominently at the party but who, clearly, was not the person who stole the object.

Scary implications for eye-witness testimomy incriminating innnocent people.
 
Last edited:
BillyJoe said:
On the ABC "Catalyst" series, they once showed five minute scene of a party. At some stage during the party, there was a clear view of a person stealing an object off a table. Afterwards you were shown a line of suspects and you had to pick the person responsible. It seems most people (including myself) picked someone that was at the party but was not the person who stole the object. They then replayed the 5 minute scene to show you that you had, in fact, chosen a person who featured prominently at the party but who, clearly, was not the person who stole the object.

Scary implications for eye-witness testimomy incriminating innnocent people.
Click to expand...


I wonder if that kind of misperception (if that's a word) is relevant in courts. I know I'd feel more comfortable now committing a crime in full view of witnesses. :)
 
All it would take is a mistake like many people made in the ABC "Catalyst" then you would have several people saying a certain person did it when it was actually someone else.

There are many variations on the idea.

I understand there are many people in prison who are not guilty of crimes. Many of them have been cleared because of DNA evidence.

Another example I heard is that it is difficult for a person to ID a person of a minority group who does not belong to that minority group.
 
rjh01 said:
All it would take is a mistake like many people made in the ABC "Catalyst" then you would have several people saying a certain person did it when it was actually someone else....I understand there are many people in prison who are not guilty of crimes. Many of them have been cleared because of DNA evidence.
Click to expand...


That jogs my memory. I'm sure that aspect of it was covered in that program. There was also the linked problem of publishing the face of a suspect in the papers.

rjh01 said:
Another example I heard is that it is difficult for a person to ID a person of a minority group who does not belong to that minority group.
Click to expand...


We are all racists to some extent. Those others are "blacks", not "individuals who have black skin". We don't distinguish between them. Sad but true to realise that. But, at least, having realised that, we can work against that tendency.
 
It is nothing to do with racism. It is to do with knowledge. It is knowing what are the differences between individuals of any group of people.
 
rjh01 said:
It is knowing what are the differences between individuals of any group of people.
Click to expand...

I don't get it.
If it's any group, why does it apply only to minority groups?
It seems to me to be a contradiction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom