Merged Derren Brown - predicting lottery numbers

[Christian Klippel]

Well, i won't trust anything that a magician tells me either shortly before, during or after the show. After all, as someone already mentioned, it is their job to lie to us and to deceive us. I mean, where would you want to draw the line? Accepting that if he makes an object disappear and telling us that it is done with magic, while in fact it is a very mundane method, is an "OK lie"? But telling us something is magic, and not done using video tricks or involves stooges, while in fact it is such, is bad?

I think that there is no problem with using technology as part of a trick. Video trickery is somewhat OK, as long as it part of some bigger trick. However, claiming that something is a clever trick and denying that it is just a video "trick", while in fact the _whole_ effect is just and only some video trick (and in this case, a rather simple and old one), is pretty lame.

The problem with that is that nowdays people have advanced technology in their own hands too. It is easy for everyone to digitally record something and play it back in every way wanted. This makes analyzing of such stuff much easier than it was back then when we had analogue VCR's and stuff. This also makes exposing lame, easy video trickery much easier too. Thousands, if not millions, of people can watch and analyze the same footage at the same time. Many people have at least rudimentary knowledge of video editing nowdays, simply because stuff like digital video cameras, video editing softwares, etc. are a commodity today, and not something special anymore that only the pro's have access too.

No idea why he did what he did, but it really was pretty lame and i guess that this incident will somewhat harm his reputation. Probably only for a short while, but i'm sure that a lot of people now think different about him than they did before this.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

Greetings,

Chris

 

[davidhorman]

1) The obvious digital shake.

There really isn't any way of making it non-obvious without building a photo-realistic real time 3d model of the studio. DB just did the best he could with current tech, and it was slickly done, I'll give him that (not a DB fan).

2) The misplaced ball.

Why are you (I assume, from the tone of your post) ascribing to extremely sly cleverness what is more easily ascribed to incompetence? (i.e., an extremely rushed assistant failing to jam all the balls in the rack properly).

If he did it any other way than a camera trick, he was doing it the hard way.

David

 

[Southwind17]

So, Southwind, am I correct that you think that all these were an accident in a show put together by Andy Nyman and Derren Brown?

1) The obvious digital shake.

2) The misplaced ball.

3) The black line in the wall (even though it could've been done in the monitor much more effectively for all I know).

4) The fact that pretty much everyone would think "split screen" as one of the first possible solutions even without the hints.

1. No (deliberate); 2. Yes (accident); 3. Irrelevant; 4. Not "fact". Most lay-people don't know any better.

Your point?

 

[Kuko 4000]

There really isn't any way of making it non-obvious without building a photo-realistic real time 3d model of the studio. DB just did the best he could with current tech, and it was slickly done, I'll give him that (not a DB fan).

Why are you (I assume, from the tone of your post) ascribing to extremely sly cleverness what is more easily ascribed to incompetence? (i.e., an extremely rushed assistant failing to jam all the balls in the rack properly).

If he did it any other way than a camera trick, he was doing it the hard way.

David

First things first, like I wrote on the previous page, I do think that the split screen method was used. What I argue is that the hints are not there by accident, rather they are there to complete the bigger picture.

Regarding your first point, that suits my argument perfectly. Every amateur video editor would recognize the effect.

About the second point you raise:

Why are you (I assume, from the tone of your post) ascribing to extremely sly cleverness what is more easily ascribed to incompetence? (i.e., an extremely rushed assistant failing to jam all the balls in the rack properly).

Because I assume they have a very experienced and skilled team in magic (Andy Nyman and Derren alone make this a given) and have most probably (probably an understatement) rehearsed this time and again, and would not take even the smallest risk in a stunt like this. They also had enough time to make sure that the balls were in their correct place if that was their aim, and Derren could have easily prolonged his way to the "other" side even more if there were any problems with the placement of the balls.

Like I've said before in this thread, I wouldn't put stuff like this past the team responsible for Derren's act, in fact, I would expect it.

 

[Kuko 4000]

Your point?

I outlined the way I saw the show in this post:

1. No (deliberate); 2. Yes (accident); 3. Irrelevant; 4. Not "fact". Most lay-people don't know any better.

2) Accident? I find this hard to believe from people who have performed way more demanding feats than lining up 6 balls next to each other.

3) How is this irrelevant to my argument that they wanted people to see that it was a video trick?

4) The thing is, pretty much every amateur video editor can show how it's done in a few minutes. All a curious lay-person needs to do is to read any kind of newspaper talking about this and they will learn that the effect can be done with simple video editing. It's in the papers all over UK.

 

[08lightning]

FYI i was approached by an aquaintance today, with an offer to join his 24person lottery prediction team. Sigh.

 

[Azrael 5]

Everyone is just repeating each other now, isnt really anything left to discuss about how it was actually done.My opinion is that anything can be achieved with video editing and am not impressed at all he is going down this route.

IF.
I'm no expert on magic but I believe it would be possible to do this effect without video edits. What happens if the secret is revealed and it's NOT video effects? Egg on lots of face.

 

[Ashles]

IF.
I'm no expert on magic but I believe it would be possible to do this effect without video edits. What happens if the secret is revealed and it's NOT video effects? Egg on lots of face.

A couple of posters have pointed out the difference in perspective of the image before the last cut (to the second camera view) compared to the camera view immediately after he cut (and during the cut we do not see the 'hand held' cameraman move).

I have compared screengrabs and sadly there is a change in perspective. It is a different camera from the one that follows Derren in from the next room, so the split screen seems almost certain.

Also I think Derren is being super super sneaky.

He said he would reveal how he did it in the show on Friday and, technically, he did.
At the start he lists some of the possibilities being touted around by viwers in which he mentions 'Split Screen'.
So, yes, in the show he did in fact reveal the method by which he achieved the trick, however he did it in a list intended to be discarded.

Very naughty.

 

[Azrael 5]

If he did use video edits there must be a reason(the bigger picture)I'm dissapointed if this is so,but I think claiming to be able to predict the lottery is a bridge too far; because no explanation other than the real one would be acceptable. In this case the real one isn't acceptable either.

 

[Merko]

Just wondering why the 2nd cameraman was there at all? He is only cut to once.

Because if you don't have at least two cameras, you can't make a cut?

Or in other words, if you need to make a cut, you need at least two cameras.

 

[Merko]

A couple of posters have pointed out the difference in perspective of the image before the last cut (to the second camera view) compared to the camera view immediately after he cut (and during the cut we do not see the 'hand held' cameraman move).

Yes, it's not only to the left, and rotated, but the 'fake' handheld is also higher up than the real one. Look at how the top of the TV aligns with the back wall.

Personally, I think that while they could have done it a bit better, it would probably not have been easy to hide really well. Eg, they could have made the 'shaking' a bit more realistic, but without parallax it would still be revealed. So it's probably one of these tricks where they decided that they only needed to do it well enough to fool 99% of the viewers first time around (I didn't spot it on first viewing), because somebody would eventually reveal it anyway.

A better version would be to have a robot that actually shakes the camera (and introduces parallax) and use a prerecorded cut with identical camera movement. But of course that's much more involved. For this, they just needed the normal tv equipment and 50 ping pong balls.

 

[Christian Klippel]

I'm wondering if there could be legal consequences from this. What if people suspect the lottery was rigged to get this outcome, just for the show, and feel betrayed.

Or if people suspect that there is some kind of flaw in the lottery system that makes this possible. It may sound stupid, but i can imagine some people out there believing that.

I mean, lot's of people have high hopes in winning the lottery, and suddenly someone comes on TV, claiming that the lottery can be beaten, making a win a 100% certain thing, and showing that live. After all, some people also believe that homeopathy and other crap is real.

So, what could happen in that case?

Greetings,

Chris

 

[Merko]

I take their point but Im going to go against the masses and say standard magic trick.
I submit this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CE7_BD6aGg

That's a very impressive trick, I think Banachek has done something similar (though I can't remember details). No idea how that works, unless he prints his own lottery tickets (presumably the explanation is much simpler).

 

[fls]

Isn't this the sort of trick that used to be done with mirrors?

Linda

 

[Ambrosia]

That's a very impressive trick, I think Banachek has done something similar (though I can't remember details). No idea how that works, unless he prints his own lottery tickets (presumably the explanation is much simpler).

Thats an effect called Natural Lottery, by Anthony Owen.

Anthony Owen is the Exec. Producer for Derren Brown.

I'd go with this being a "normal trick" and not a camera trick. Tho the papers the bloggites et al have decreed that this is a camera trick, Derren himself could repeat this with a live audience, reveal the method completely and everyone and their dog will still believe it was a camera trick.

Camera Trickery is a plausible explanation for sure. Tho I am sure there are others.

It also seems that some footage filmed in '08 of Derren aboard an open top bus with people holding up the exact same 6 balls as were chosen on Wednesday was cut from the very end of the show. I wonder why that might have been.

 

[JFrankA]

Thats an effect called Natural Lottery, by Anthony Owen.

Anthony Owen is the Exec. Producer for Derren Brown.

I'd go with this being a "normal trick" and not a camera trick. Tho the papers the bloggites et al have decreed that this is a camera trick, Derren himself could repeat this with a live audience, reveal the method completely and everyone and their dog will still believe it was a camera trick.

I've been lurking at this thread because I didn't think I'd get to see the actual show. Well, thanks to youtube I just did.

I have to agree with Ambrosia here, I'm leaning more towards a "normal" trick. But I would like to mention what Ambrosia said was true: a magician can perform a trick, tell the audience exactly how it was done, and the audience would not believe it. It happens to me quite a few times.

And my question is this: if it was a camera trick, why is that a disappointment? We all know it's a trick. And Derren's style is to hear his give an explanation that is almost plausible. He hasn't deviated from his style at all. I still found the special entertaining.

 

[Southwind17]

2) Accident? I find this hard to believe from people who have performed way more demanding feats than lining up 6 balls next to each other.

Seems very plausible to me that in the rush of the moment the assistant could easily mess up here, especially with a seemingly ill-fitting rack (which still troubles me).

3) How is this irrelevant to my argument that they wanted people to see that it was a video trick?

I don't agree with your argument, that's how.

4) The thing is, pretty much every amateur video editor can show how it's done in a few minutes. All a curious lay-person needs to do is to read any kind of newspaper talking about this and they will learn that the effect can be done with simple video editing. It's in the papers all over UK.

Sure, but by then the stunt has had the desired effect. If somebody shows you an amazing trick then explains how it's done, does that affect your amazement or emotion at the time the trick was done? Of course not.

Isn't this the sort of trick that used to be done with mirrors?

... and smoke?!

I'd go with this being a "normal trick" and not a camera trick. Tho the papers the bloggites et al have decreed that this is a camera trick, Derren himself could repeat this with a live audience, reveal the method completely and everyone and their dog will still believe it was a camera trick.

Care to posit an explanation then? If it's a "normal trick" then it's surely been done before, albeit with a slight theme variation.

It also seems that some footage filmed in '08 of Derren aboard an open top bus with people holding up the exact same 6 balls as were chosen on Wednesday was cut from the very end of the show. I wonder why that might have been.

"Seems"? What's you're source for this revelation?

And my question is this: if it was a camera trick, why is that a disappointment?

Why? As I wrote before:

We could all be equally convincing (to the unitiated) given access to the same resources. To my mind, the test of a good magician is one who can perform kick-ass stunts live without resorting to stooges and plants.

If I posted an equally convincing video on Toutube showing a similarly convincing trick, as some people already have, would you be equally impressed? I doubt it. I guess you hold DB in high esteem for the same reason that many people did Michael Jackson, thereby allowing your judgement to be tainted when a mediocre performance is delivered.

 

[Kuko 4000]

It also seems that some footage filmed in '08 of Derren aboard an open top bus with people holding up the exact same 6 balls as were chosen on Wednesday was cut from the very end of the show. I wonder why that might have been.

The story goes like this:

http://ninethirtyfive.wordpress.com...y-reveal-missing-footage-proves-he-rigged-it/

And:

http://ow.ly/p340

I can imagine they wanted to show this as the real highlight on TV too, but because everyone was already on the "video trick" train they didn't want to go overboard with it. Or maybe nothing like that ever happened in the live show and the guy is making it up for fun.

 

[Kuko 4000]

I'm a bit surprised many people are so worried about the "main method", I guess that overshadows everything else. For me it was all about the "show" and how he dresses and mixes things up, just like it has always been with Derren. The back bone and whole point of the show was the wonderful ride those 24 people got, and I thought it was excellent TV. I mean, making people believe they can predict the lottery numbers through automatic writing, teamwork and playing in the garden is amazing, and just bonkers. The reactions of the participants is what it's all about and we got a good look inside, for me this was the main "effect" here and what Derren is all about.

 

[Kuko 4000]

Seems very plausible to me that in the rush of the moment the assistant could easily mess up here, especially with a seemingly ill-fitting rack (which still troubles me).

So you're asking me to believe that a team with so much skill and experience in the world of magic have accidentally messed up an event this big by not having a suitable rack for the balls? And on top of that, using an assistant who somehow messes up the switch, even though they could've stalled for longer if they needed?

To me that just doesn't add up, everything's possible of course, but this to me seems very improbable.

I don't agree with your argument, that's how.

Ok, let's approach it from another angle, why do you think they had the line on the wall when they could've had it digitally on monitor (which is how I would've done it) to make it much more accurate?

To keep things in perspective, it's pretty much impossible to tell whether there is any black line on the wall at all, since Derren blocks up the space when he gets behind the balls, so this "clue" might not be a clue at all.

Sure, but by then the stunt has had the desired effect. If somebody shows you an amazing trick then explains how it's done, does that affect your amazement or emotion at the time the trick was done? Of course not.

Of course, but this is besides my point. Which was that Derren could've made up any psychic / pseudoscientific explanation without causing large amounts of people to believe in it because by then the general public through newspapers (which usually back up their woo-beliefs) and YouTube had already made up their minds that it was just a video trick. All good in the end.