The part where he is filming the entire table at the beginning is actual objects on the table. However the part where he spins each around individually is accurate. You can really tell the first and second parts are different by noticing how much of the shoe overlaps the paper as well as the orientation of the paper that holds the tape.
Agreed. There don't look to be any camera tricks per se, just shots that aren't of what they at first seem to be, and an implicit initial assumption in the viewer's mind that they're looking at the same objects as before. The first shot, entering the room, is not of anamorphs, it's of the real objects; all three have height, seen by the way they overlap and move against features in the background of the shot. The shoe in particular also visibly changes shape around the top of the heel as the camera pans. Then there's a deliberately obvious blackout; the director is telling us he's moving to a different shot, and most definitely isn't lying to us, he simply isn't telling us what he's about to do (as READYdot says, very much in the best traditions of stage magic – illusions are always more impressive if you don't realise what you're about to see). After that we're always looking at anamorphs, all shot with only blank desk surface behind them, giving no visual clues that they haven't got height. They're not perfect, though, because camera focus gives the game away if you look carefully – as an example, at 0:17 the "top" corner of the Rubik's cube is in focus, but the whole of the bottom of the shot is blurred; three seconds later, at 0:20 the focus has been pulled to bring the bottom into definition, but there's now increasing blurring as you move up the shot (and tellingly what's still visible of the "top" of the cube is just as far out of focus as the writing on the paper "behind" it). There are similar effect, although not as strong, on the other two anamorphs (the shoe has least to show because it's not greatly distorted in the first place).
The trick is that it is an anamorphose. Anamorphoses are astonishing and the the human eye and brain are easily tricked into believing them. The best part here is that the shadows are used very correctly and thus the illusion wins in accuracy.
Notice how after it does the first few illusions, the items are sitting in the background without the paper anywhere near them? It's completely faked. Not even a true optical illusion, it's just good graphic editing. I think that makes this far less impressive since it's not at all an actually designed illusion on paper.
It's a trick, but well done one
The part where he is filming the entire table at the beginning is actual objects on the table. However the part where he spins each around individually is accurate. You can really tell the first and second parts are different by noticing how much of the shoe overlaps the paper as well as the orientation of the paper that holds the tape.
Agreed. There don't look to be any camera tricks per se, just shots that aren't of what they at first seem to be, and an implicit initial assumption in the viewer's mind that they're looking at the same objects as before. The first shot, entering the room, is not of anamorphs, it's of the real objects; all three have height, seen by the way they overlap and move against features in the background of the shot. The shoe in particular also visibly changes shape around the top of the heel as the camera pans. Then there's a deliberately obvious blackout; the director is telling us he's moving to a different shot, and most definitely isn't lying to us, he simply isn't telling us what he's about to do (as READYdot says, very much in the best traditions of stage magic – illusions are always more impressive if you don't realise what you're about to see). After that we're always looking at anamorphs, all shot with only blank desk surface behind them, giving no visual clues that they haven't got height. They're not perfect, though, because camera focus gives the game away if you look carefully – as an example, at 0:17 the "top" corner of the Rubik's cube is in focus, but the whole of the bottom of the shot is blurred; three seconds later, at 0:20 the focus has been pulled to bring the bottom into definition, but there's now increasing blurring as you move up the shot (and tellingly what's still visible of the "top" of the cube is just as far out of focus as the writing on the paper "behind" it). There are similar effect, although not as strong, on the other two anamorphs (the shoe has least to show because it's not greatly distorted in the first place).
Definitely a trick. Perspective is present before the camera zooms in and refocuses. That's when the cut happens.
The trick is that it is an anamorphose. Anamorphoses are astonishing and the the human eye and brain are easily tricked into believing them. The best part here is that the shadows are used very correctly and thus the illusion wins in accuracy.
Oh and the first part is just the real objects, just to intensify the illusion afterwards. Just like stage mages do it.
Notice how after it does the first few illusions, the items are sitting in the background without the paper anywhere near them? It's completely faked. Not even a true optical illusion, it's just good graphic editing. I think that makes this far less impressive since it's not at all an actually designed illusion on paper.