{"id":53,"date":"2004-11-24T17:11:51","date_gmt":"2004-11-24T22:11:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/?p=53"},"modified":"2004-11-24T17:13:26","modified_gmt":"2004-11-24T22:13:26","slug":"time-to-kill","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/2004\/11\/24\/time-to-kill\/","title":{"rendered":"Time to kill."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>You might have noticed that, on occasion, I mention the plague in magic called &#8220;knock-offs&#8221; &#8212; where one manufacturer takes another manufacturer&#8217;s item and duplicates it.  I won&#8217;t spill precious digital ink going over the same territory; you can read some of my older blog entries for those sermons. Suffice it to say that I condemn knock-offs as unethical behavior and particularly egregious in this tiny world of magic and mentalism. It is not <em>innovation<\/em> to take someone else&#8217;s trick and duplicate it.<\/p>\n<p>One of the apparent knock-offs I&#8217;ve mentioned is Magic Makers&#8217; <em>The Time Machine<\/em>, which to my eye is a duplicate of <a target='_blank' href=\"http:\/\/www.magia.com.ar\/\">Bazar de Magia&#8217;s<\/a> <em><a target='_blank' href=\"http:\/\/www.magia.com.ar\/index.php?w=showdetails&#038;itemId=1539\">Watch &#038; Wear<\/a><\/em> trick. Visually, they are nearly identical in both size, styling and coloring. But the real test for it being a duplicate required comparisons between the watches&#8217; insides. <\/p>\n<p>The purpose of this post is to lay out some observations I&#8217;ve made between both watches. Please read them over. Study the pictures. Then draw your own conclusions.<\/p>\n<p>I already had <em>The Time Machine<\/em>, having purchased it at a favorable price a couple of years ago via an eBay auction before I&#8217;d become aware that it and Bazar de Magia&#8217;s <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em> were being compared as identical twins. Since I didn&#8217;t have <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em>, I contacted Martin at Bazar de Magia and asked if he&#8217;d be willing to send to me a piece for the purposes of comparison. He quickly agreed and a safely packaged <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em> was on its way from Buenos Aires, Argentina to Casa LeBlanc.<\/p>\n<p>My package from Bazar de Magia arrived late last week. I immediately walked it to my watch bench for a look.<\/p>\n<p>Here is a picture of Bazar de Magia&#8217;s <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em> as you receive it. It is packaged in a spring-closed watch box. It is accompanied by a nicely printed owners manual containing information on the watch itself, basic operation, and routines contributed by Ernesto Canki and Trever Lewis. There&#8217;s also a note to watch shops with instructions on replacing the watch battery without causing harm to the gimmick. Finally, there&#8217;s a numbered certificate spelling out the details of your one year warranty.<center><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/images\/packaging_ww.jpg\" width=500 height=338><\/center><\/p>\n<p>In comparison, Magic Makers&#8217; <em>The Time Machine<\/em> arrives in a felt covered plastic sleeve. The instructions are printed on three separate 8-1\/2 x 11 sheets of paper loosely folded together around the plastic watch sleeve. The instructions state, <em>&#8220;Unlike its nearest competitor it was engineered from the ground up and manufactured using some of the finest components available.&#8221;<\/em> You are warned about damaging the watch stem when replacing the battery, and given details of your 30 day warranty.<\/p>\n<p><center><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/images\/packaging_tm.jpg\" width=500 height=244><\/center><\/p>\n<p><em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em> sells on the street for about $160; <em>The Time Machine<\/em> can be picked up for around $80.<\/p>\n<p>Let&#8217;s deal with the <em>&#8220;engineered from the ground up&#8221;<\/em> claim. <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em> hit the market almost seven years ago. A couple of years later, <em>The Time Machine<\/em> was released. Here are both watch faces side by side:<\/p>\n<p><center><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/images\/face.jpg\" width=500 height=452><\/center><\/p>\n<p>To my mind, the remarkable similarity between these watches immediately called into question what Magic Makers means by <em>&#8220;engineered from the ground up.&#8221;<\/em> <\/p>\n<p>The next step in comparison involved removing the watch case backs and viewing the watch movements.  <\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of different quartz movements used in thousands of styles of watches manufactured each year. Quartz movements basically consist of circuitry that uses a crystal to establish a computer clock signal that&#8217;s fed to a tiny stepper motor, all powered by a small battery. Tuned properly, the stepper motor advances the watch gears in proper time.<\/p>\n<p>Over the years quartz movements have gotten smaller to the point where an incredibly accurate watch movement would fit on the fingernail of your smallest finger.<\/p>\n<p>In viewing the movements nestled in the watch cases of both watches, it became apparent they were identical. By that, I mean they were the same model movement manufactured by the same Asian factory: Precision Time Co., LTD in Shenzhen, a city in the Guangdong Province of China. The next two pictures bare that out. They are photos taken of the watch movements under a microscope at 10X:<\/p>\n<p><center><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/images\/movements_10X.jpg\" width=500 height=188><\/center><\/p>\n<p>These are pictures of the center of the movement, but at 60X:<\/p>\n<p><center><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/images\/movements_60X.jpg\" width=500 height=188><\/center><\/p>\n<p>So. What does <em>&#8220;engineered from the ground up&#8221;<\/em> actually mean? Certainly not the look of the watch. Certainly not the watch movement.<\/p>\n<p>But the bigger question is this: does it matter to you?<\/p>\n<p>Does it matter to you that one manufacturer produces prop that&#8217;s virtually identical to that of one that&#8217;s been on the market for years, while claiming to have designed it <em>&#8220;from the ground up&#8221;<\/em>?<\/p>\n<p>As I&#8217;ve written before, there are <em>effects<\/em>, <em>methods<\/em> and <em>tricks<\/em>. They are not the same thing, although you will see many people refer to a <em>trick<\/em> as an <em>effect<\/em>. A card turning face up in a face down deck is an effect. A half-pass or Ultra Mental are methods. <em>Invisible Deck<\/em> is a trick.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of predicting the hour and minute chosen by a spectator is an effect. Leslie Anderson&#8217;s watch trick (Magick #246) &#8212;  which was the foundation for Danny Korem&#8217;s <em>&#8220;Stull-ess Watch Stunner&#8221;<\/em> (from <em>The Lost Pages of Kabbala<\/em>) among others &#8212; is just one way of many to create the effect you can with a <em>Stull Watch<\/em>, <em>Perfect Time<\/em>, <em>Watch &#038; Wear<\/em>, and <em>The Time Machine<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>But this is not about duplicating an <em>effect<\/em>. It&#8217;s not about duplicating the <em>method<\/em>. It&#8217;s about blatantly duplicating a particular <em>version<\/em> of a trick used to create the effect, <em>down to the same watch style, size and color<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>I find such behavior detrimental to the world of magic, and I believe it&#8217;s unethical behavior. Production of such props is bad enough, but customers purchasing knock-offs says three things: first, you aren&#8217;t interested in recognizing and supporting the intellectual rights of magic inventors; second, you tell inventors their ideas aren&#8217;t worth respecting or protecting; and third &#8212; and this is the worst part &#8212; you reward knock-off manufacturers, which tells them they have a legitimate place in our little world of magic.<\/p>\n<p>Is that what you believe?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>You might have noticed that, on occasion, I mention the plague in magic called &#8220;knock-offs&#8221; &#8212; where one manufacturer takes another manufacturer&#8217;s item and duplicates it. I won&#8217;t spill precious digital ink going over the same territory; you can read some of my older blog entries for those sermons. Suffice it to say that I <a class=\"read-more\" href=\"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/2004\/11\/24\/time-to-kill\/\">[&hellip;]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=53"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=53"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=53"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.escamoteurettes.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=53"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}