Merged Derren Brown - predicting lottery numbers

[Kuko 4000]

My memory isn't that great, but I vaguely recall an episode where he had people looking out of a window at a street, and "concentrating" to try to influence people walking along the street. People were "caused" to stop in their tracks. They were later interviewed and said that they felt something strange, like they suddenly realised they'd forgotten something.

I could see how that was done other than by
1) Stooges
2) Waiting for absolutely ages until you found someone who did that by chance.

Ok, a couple of "dual reality" ideas to achieve the effect come to my mind instantly, so I'm pretty sure there are many ways to do this.

 

[Southwind17]

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 agree - hard to believe, given the probable planning. Don't forget, though, that the raised ball probably didn't look conspicuous to the person placing the balls. It's only when looking from the front on a similar plane that the misalignment is obvious. Regardless, why the rack needed to be such a tight fit still puzzles me. And did you notice that whilst all of the numbers on the balls were angled upwards the misplaced ball was the most pronounced? That would be consistent with the balls having been rotated in-situ, and the misplaced ball "riding up". The footage seems to show a gradual movement still to me - not a sudden "jump"!

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?

I don't think the line on the wall is either deliberate or of any relevance to the trick, as you acknowledge yourself:

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.

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.

So why would he do that then?

 

[Ambrosia]

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.

nothing original under the sun.

So lets say it's a "standard trick" We know that the balls must either be marked or switched in the 30 seconds or so from the moment the lottery balls are revealed on the BBC to when he turned his stand around.

We can see that there is a black line "built in" to the brick wall that appears directly above the racked "balls" owing to the camera angle, and also that no other line appears on the back wall of comparable length anwhere in shot.
Note that there is a cm or two of depth to the stand under where the base of the balls touch it.

Derren is wearing a black suit/shirt and when he stands directly behind the racked balls early in the trick, and when he is away from the balls, at all times the camera angle given to the viewer is white ball on black background.

While the lottery result is being determined Derren is strangely quiet, is standing side on to the camera and one hand is hidden from view - also the card chosen for him to write the result on is of sufficient size so as to be able to mask his right arm from the viewer, which would be free to manipulate something hidden behind the TV.

We the viewer never get to see the whole setup, we don't see behind the TV for example. While Derren does walk the whole 360 degrees around the stand as if to imply there are no gimmicks, he does so awkwardly and not in one go.

The balls are gimmick "balls" and some controlling device is hidden behind the TV by means of the camera angles used. The straight lines in the wall of the backdrop also aiding to mask this device.

Derren also uses a sleight of some description to aid this effect after walking to the stand immediately before the reveal, and the zoom in of the camera as the balls are being revealed also helps to hide something we are not supposed to see.

If only one or two angles are able to be viewed to make the effect work then this precludes allowing a studio audience.

Thats just speculation. I have no idea how it was really done, I am sure there are several other even simpler explanations that don't involve camera trickery. It could well have been a camera trick, but I don't see that it *must* have been a camera trick.

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

The blog already posted that correlates with posts from Derrens blog around that time that he was filming on a bus around then. "seems" cos it's not exactly conclusive evidence.

 

[foxprorawks]

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.

One of the trademarks of Derren Brown's shows is a big reveal at the end of the show which ties everything together.

This TV show was one of a series - it's concievable that this footage will surface in the last show of the series. This might explain why Derren held up a snowflake in one of the show's trailers (the footage on the bus was reputedly filmed in November 2008).

Then again, this could all be a smokescreen...

 

[Southwind17]

nothing original under the sun.

So lets say it's a "standard trick" We know that the balls must either be marked or switched in the 30 seconds or so from the moment the lottery balls are revealed on the BBC to when he turned his stand around.

We can see that there is a black line "built in" to the brick wall that appears directly above the racked "balls" owing to the camera angle, and also that no other line appears on the back wall of comparable length anwhere in shot.
Note that there is a cm or two of depth to the stand under where the base of the balls touch it.

Derren is wearing a black suit/shirt and when he stands directly behind the racked balls early in the trick, and when he is away from the balls, at all times the camera angle given to the viewer is white ball on black background.

While the lottery result is being determined Derren is strangely quiet, is standing side on to the camera and one hand is hidden from view - also the card chosen for him to write the result on is of sufficient size so as to be able to mask his right arm from the viewer, which would be free to manipulate something hidden behind the TV.

We the viewer never get to see the whole setup, we don't see behind the TV for example. While Derren does walk the whole 360 degrees around the stand as if to imply there are no gimmicks, he does so awkwardly and not in one go.

The balls are gimmick "balls" and some controlling device is hidden behind the TV by means of the camera angles used. The straight lines in the wall of the backdrop also aiding to mask this device.

Derren also uses a sleight of some description to aid this effect after walking to the stand immediately before the reveal, and the zoom in of the camera as the balls are being revealed also helps to hide something we are not supposed to see.

If only one or two angles are able to be viewed to make the effect work then this precludes allowing a studio audience.

Thats just speculation. I have no idea how it was really done, I am sure there are several other even simpler explanations that don't involve camera trickery. It could well have been a camera trick, but I don't see that it *must* have been a camera trick.

Don't give up the day job mate!

 

[Kuko 4000]

This might explain why Derren held up a snowflake in one of the show's trailers (the footage on the bus was reputedly filmed in November 2008).

Then again, this could all be a smokescreen...

The snowflake can be a number of things, from a random misdirection to something more meaningful. If it's something more meaningful, to me, the most obvious link would be to the "split / freeze screen method".

 

[AndyD]

Can someone please post a "concise" overview of the final show?

I see that one explanation involves an averaging of guesses but was that it? That's a bit like saying John Edward knows what your Grandma looked like because he talks with the dead. Was camera trickery ever explicitly denied? Is it clear that he finished the show by saying it was all a trick as some have implied? It's difficult to discern accurate answers from the discussion here.

For those of us on the bottom half of the globe who got to see promos for the event on TV but did not get to see the reveal program, can someone please summarise it? (Or point to where a summary might already be).

Having blogged the event, it would be nice to able to blog an informed follow-up. (Brown's own blog is down).

Thanks.

 

[foxprorawks]

Hopefully you'll be able to view this - it's in 5 parts.

I can't post a URL, but search for the user waackomann in YouTube.

 

[Kuko 4000]

The footage seems to show a gradual movement still to me - not a sudden "jump"!

If it is a gradual movement, the split screen method loses its most powerful piece of evidence. The ball could've risen gradually through a simple combination of pressure and a slight change in temperature. The lamps alone are probably enough for that. Anyways, from the material I have available, it is very difficult to see whether it is gradual or sudden.

 

[Kuko 4000]

So why would he do that then?

I'm sorry I don't follow you, why would he do what?

Do you mean the misleading explanation?

A: because it is and has been his main thing from the very beginning.


Or why would they want the general public to eventually find out that it was probably a video trick?

A: because that would very quickly stop many othewise gullible people to take the fake explanation seriously. It is very well documented in his books and interviews that he is aware and a bit concerned that some people think that he really has supernatural powers. And because in reality he is one of the biggest public advocates of scepticism in the popular entertainment world, having challenged homeopathy, astrology, miracle healers, psychics, etc. in his television shows.

 

[sphenisc]

If 24 people would each post exactly when they think the jump occurs that should gives us a very good idea of when irt actually happened.

Is there a name for this?

 

[JFrankA]

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.

I completely and utterly disagree with you there. It takes more than knowing how to do a trick to be a magician. Hell, anyone here probably knows the French Drop and I can teach it to a million people. They can all perform it, but that still doesn't make them magicians.

I could tell someone a joke, but does that mean s/he is a comedian? Hell, that person can say what I say verbatim and still not get a laugh.

The purpose of the magician is to fool you in any way s/he can and make it entertaining. Using stooges, camera tricks, sleight of hand, gimmicks, whatever doesn't matter. It's not the method, it's the result.

If I posted an equally convincing video on Toutube showing a similarly convincing trick, as some people already have, would you be equally impressed?

Depends on how you performed it.

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.

And I could say that you are letting your self-importance get in the way of seeing what really is going on here. Good to know your mind reading powers are intact.

When I was about ten years old I received a magic kit for Christmas. One of those big ones with the words "OVER 50 MAGIC TRICKS" splashed on the box. Now this was in the days before the internet, DVD's, even video tape. So it was a big box, with a lot of plastic playthings and this big book.

I dived into it. Some tricks I got pretty well, some I've never mastered, there were even a couple I never bothered to read. Of course, the ones I knew well, I performed.

My favorite one, because it was the messiest, was called "The Rice Bowls". Essentially, it was two empty rice bowls. You filled one with rice and cover it with the other bowl as you told the story of a child who wanted to feed his family and all he had was one bowl full of rice. With a little gesture, you explained that the child wanted to help his family so badly, he closed his eyes and wished on a star. You then lift the top bowl off and the audience sees that the quantity of rice doubled. The rice overflowed all over as the bowl was lifted.

The story continues that he goes of with his two bowls full of rice to feed his family. But when he gets there, his mother says that there is no water to drink and they can't eat without water. (What an ungrateful bunch of .......) So you make some more magical gestures over one of the bowls, tell the audience that the kid made one more wish and the rice in that bowl turns into water. A clever trick. Personally, I never liked the story. I mean, the kid ended up with the same amount of rice he started....

Anyway, I wrote all that to make a point. This was from a toy magic kit. Something you see at KBToys for about $30.00.

So now, about 35 years later, I'm watching "Masters of Illusion" on television. This show showcases magicians who are presently performing in Vegas, all doing one piece from their routines. A magician named "Mi Ling" (I think) started her bit. To my surprise, she did "The Rice Bowls" trick. Exactly the same trick, but instead of telling a story, she danced about with other dancers.

It makes me think that if this person can take a trick that I, at ten years old, learned in magic toy kit, can not only be successful in Vegas but get that trick on national television, then the secret of the trick really doesn't matter.

I was entertained. She did a beautiful job. She was enthralling, she drew you in and she was amazing. Who cares if she did something that you could go to a toy store and buy and do the same thing?

I bet you couldn't have done it better than her. I know I couldn't.

Same goes for Derren or any other magician.

 

[Sherman Bay]

I can't imagine what importance the black line on the wall has. None whatsoever. There's other junk in the background -- wires, etc. Are they important, too, or props to suggest we are backstage, or just random junk that happened to be there?

If you are postulating Darren's out of sight hand was controlling some mechanism during the TV show, that's a pretty complicated solution to a simple problem (like saying Uri Geller uses a special chemical or electrical device to rub on spoons and make them melt). Certainly if he was manipulating something, he is enough of a professional that his patter wouldn't stop; that's all part of misdirection. IMHO, I think he stopped talking just so his patter wouldn't cover the ball announcer. He was probably watching the assistant out of the corner of his eye so he could gauge how much time he would need to fill before the reveal.

As far as the jumping ball...I imagine the tray was deliberately made so all balls fit snugly so they wouldn't roll around when the tray was moved. Remember that it was moved either once or twice -- possibly filled with the numbered balls off camera, then moved to the stand while the video covered up that action, then rotated by Darren. The balls were hastily placed by an assistant; they may not have been all that uniform in diameter and lights may have caused stuff to expand slightly on stage. As far as the numbers tilted up a bit, for all we know the assistant was told to do that to avoid the numbers being partly covered by the tray's front rail.

Remember, the assistant's primary task was to get the correctly numbered balls in the tray, in the correct order, in a short period of time. Everything else was secondary, although they probably wish he had been a bit more careful now.

 

[Deetee]

Using the "wisdom of crowds", I think we can calculate the average (well, median really) out all the 23,451 postulates/guesses as to how he did it that have been posted on the internet so far and arrive at the truth....

Split screen.

 

[Azrael 5]

Thats an effect called Natural Lottery, by Anthony Owen.

.

The YouTube lottery effect I linked was not Anthony Owen's version.Not sure if you are saying it was or were referring to Banchek effect previous poster mentioned.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

There happened to be a David Blaine prog (what is Magic) on just after the Derren Brown one on Friday where Blaine did exactly the same ( Anthony Owen )lottery ticket trick with the "random" numbers.

I have to say having seen virtually all his TV stuff I have been increasing bored with Derren Brown, while he can have his moments and at least was intially trying something that appeared different and new , and doing it very well, it's all now getting a bit tedious and unconvincing. "Dual reality" or not, maybe I am no longer his target audience.
I get the feeling he was rumbled by Friday - and knew it - something that likely would not have been possible to spread so quickly and with such detail without the internet.

-

 

[Darat]

He's got the problem that many variety acts have these days once they make it "big" on TV, you need so much new material for every new show. You can't just keep recycling your old stuff.

I remember hearing an interview with a comedian touching on this, he was being asked why he didn't do as much TV these days and his response was along the lines of "One TV show uses up as much material as you need for 10 years of live shows."

 

[AndyD]

Split screen illusions were a pretty neat idea when Patty Duke played identical cousins Patty and Cathy Lane in the 1960's - but in 2009?

Of course, Brown could still "pull a rabbit out of the hat" by releasing footage from the otherwise redundant second camera employed on Lotto night, and show the entire draw from a different angle in such a way as to eliminate split-screen speculation. I, for one, hope he does.

 

[Ambrosia]

The YouTube lottery effect I linked was not Anthony Owen's version.Not sure if you are saying it was or were referring to Banchek effect previous poster mentioned.

I thought it was the same effect, my mistake.
Just goes to show there are many ways to skin the proverbial cat.

As far as DB stopping talking, why can't that just be so the production team kills all the on stage mics and feeds the sound from the TV pictures directly to the output so as to mask completely the sounds being made by whatever method was being used at the time to switch/mark the balls.

Southwind:

what makes you think I *have* a day job

 

[AndyD]

For those who didn't see it and can't download large Youtube files, the Guardian appear to have live-blogged the reveal show here. Scroll down for the blog comments.

Did Brown jump the shark - or is he about to be devoured by it?