1) The "mirror" is actually just an empty frame surrounding a hole in the wall.
2) The "reflection" is the actual actor doing the voice recording (or someone who is mouthing the words at the same time as the guy holding the camera).
3) The "reflection" guy is just mimicking the actions of the actual camera holder.

You can see a slight mis-match between the actions in the "mirror" and the actual camera movement.

On the frame where he is putting the camera down and about to walk away from the "Mirror", his feet in the "Mirror" are lined up with each other. But when you see his actual feet on our side of the mirror, his left foot is sticking out more than the right! HD recording sounds right to me.

The frame holds a mirror that is pulled during the transitions. (Hand in front of camera and tilt down.) When the mirror is gone a twin actor behind the frame acts out the camera holders movements. The roll of paper is glued to the floor as is another on the other side. This is to convince you that a mirror is actually there.

It's obviously not a mirror. Fast forward to 0:45 when he puts his hand to the mirror.

You will notice that all his fingers match up convincingly except for his thumb. His real thumb and the reflection don't even come close to touching.

Nice mimic job though.

I agree with vortex.

At the beginning, when he points the camera at the chrome item, the camera conveniently covers his face, but his hair doesn't seem to match.

So it could be either a hole in the wall framed to look like a mirror, or possibly an HD monitor, though that seems less likely.

The "HD might give you a clue line" also precedes a fairly close look at both sets of trowsers, one of which has pinstripes, but the other doesn't seem to. You would need HD to see that difference.

"Can you guess how it's done? Want to know?"

What if I say, "Who cares?"

Comes from too many years of doing close-up magic, I guess.

The girl's socks are a different color. When she gets up, they're light blue, with darker blue tips. When the camera pans around to the "mirror", and she comes back in, she's wearing completely dark socks.

It's still pretty nicely done though.

There is no mirror for certain.
The clothes on the rack in the back are different the hair of the girl is in front of her shoulders when she sits down and then on the back when he turns.
There is no reflection.
And Just pay attention when he puts his hand on the "mirror" : Usually when you film something the camera is in the Center of the picture? not somewhere way down and right, don't you think ? :)

so it's either a hole in the wall (more plausible) or a HDTV.

I agree with vortex as well, if you move to time index 0:59 he begins to move the "invisible" phone and at time index roughly 1:00 the camera actually moves., check it out.

either near identical actors or identical twin actors with a lot of practice.

Wow- I thought that was just completely obvious. Anyone who's ever looked into a mirror knows it reflects every movement exactly in perfect sync and this one was way off at times. Now why did I have to watch a commercial again? FAIL.

The camera on the front of the headset streams through to the back side so in reality it's still there, but recognition software maybe allows the cam to hide itself, just how they do on the news on a weather broadcast, all green becomes the background sort of thing.

the wood-grain pattern on the floor is different in the "mirror", also feet in different position. i think the real key to this viral video is the fact that you have people pouring over every frame of this video and not really paying attention to the fact that it's HD making this level of detail to find the "tells" of the trick possible. well played samsung.

I agree with Vortex and the rest. That's not a mirror. It's a hole in a wall with a frame to make it seem like a mirror. The condo next door is obviously similar, like many apartment buildings.

Aside from the hands not matching up properly (thumbs are very noticeably not touching), other items around the room are different.

First of all, there are two different dark haired women. They have not only subtle differences in clothing but face as well. The socks as someone noticed and the chin.

Then there's the area behind her, the coat rack. Similar items, arranged differently. There's also an art piece in the beginning on the wall that's a series of letters, but it's a picture in the "mirror" (behind his head).

Then there's a black stick next to the plant at around 1:16 that should be in frame on the camera's side if it were a mirror.

Lastly, the guy is obviously wearing a mic. You can see it beneath his clothing at the waist and another piece in the middle of his chest.

So, agreed. Not a mirror, well choreographed and obviously someone beside him snatches the phone from his hand when the camera-man moves his hand over the lens.

The lines on the gift wrap leaning on the mirror don't match

Never mind they do

Although an HD camera, if there was an HDTV there, there would be some sort of distortion, color imbalance, and certainly some amount of focus blur when he moves to and from the mirror-image. My vote is definitely a hole in the wall.

I have a screen shot of his hand in front of the lens this would not be possible we are watching a recording that has been flipped on it's horizontal access in the "mirror" pause and play and pause the playback and you will see his hand in front of the lens

As far as I know, you can't focus an image from a mirror.

fake.. ive worked with that guy before, hes a vampire and doesnt normally have a reflection, luckily hes also a twin so it all worked out for the best

fake.. ive worked with that guy before, hes a vampire and doesnt normally have a reflection, luckily hes also a twin so it all worked out for the best

I think the camera has lens in the other side that records his face, then it inverts the image and inserts the frame in the image created by the front lens of the camera in itself position.

I think the camera has lens in the other side that records his face, then it inverts the image and inserts the frame in the image created by the front lens of the camera in itself position.

One thing I noticed was that if you pause the video around 0:16 seconds you can see the phone's camera lens on the left side in the reflection of the tea/flower pot or whatever it is. Then when the phone is shown in the wall mirror the camera lens is on the right side of the phone. During that transition the phone was not flipped so this leads me to believe that there is a duplicate set beyond the wall. Also the girlfriend shown before the guy takes the camera shot off of the mirror, her hair is in front of her chest and when he turns around to look at her it's behind her on her back.

I love stuff like this. It would be easy if there was a hole in the wall but unless the wall between apartments in 1 inch thick this is not an option I have not figured it out yet but there are some differences between the mirror and the real side. The biggest difference being the foot placement at the end in the mirror and his real feet. The also is a difference with the girls hair and the way she is sitting. I also don't think that it is a LCD screen because you would be able to see the pixels when he gets up close. Very well done how ever they did it.

At 1:26 you can see the reflection of the other guy filming in the shininess of the black finish of the camera. Nice illusion!

While they got the reversal of the Samsung logo on the "reflected" phone right, go to 1:27, the "reflected" letters on the wall. The letter B is facing the wrong direction. They got the other letters correct. Ergo, no reflection.

It's possible that he is advertising a feature. Is the back of the camera a full screen with the ability to change the direction (forward or back) the camera faces?

Another dead give away is that when the girl walks back in the room in "reflection" she sits down on left hand side of the table but when he turns back around at the end to talk to her, she's sitting on the other side of the table.

Quit obsessing about this you stupid geeks. I watched it once and it's nonsense BS. Jesus get a life.

Obviously not a mirror. The reflection at his feet at the end of the video does not match what we see in the mirror (no sunlight, lined shadows on the floor in the "mirror").

The samsung logo is obviously not completely reversed (00:48). They mirrored all but both "S" because their shape can easily trick the rotation-invariant pattern processing of your visual system. But HD does see what your brain won't notice...

Where's Waldo!!!
From roughly 20 to 28 sec's the red coat on the coat rack lies almost flat against the rack. From 44 onward it is pulled out way farther from the rack. So the theory that it is a recording is definitely backed up.

is not a mirror, only a frame whit a glass in there

its magic

it is a whole nother room behind him , the letter in the back ground just behind his head are reading the right way in a mirror .

That's so bullshit! No editing! Frame Cuts. There had to be a conversion somewhere.

The frames are off, and they were too lazy to paint up the dry wall where the "apparent" mirror was.

No phone? FRAME CUT!!

I've even created a website analyzing this video.

http://www.stealthisprofile.com/

Roman Polanski did the same in his film from 1967: "Dance of the Vampires". It´s the scene within the Ballroom. no mirror but two identical rooms which are connected by a whole in the wall surrounded by a frame, pretending to be a mirror.

1:12 to 1:15 lag in the camera motion according tot the "reflection"

fake

It is fake because the man in the mirror turns then like half a second later the camera turns. It is around :58

Photoshoped - just without a computer and in realtime.

besides the little detailr people might find wrong in the "mirrored " image, samsung has given us a pretty clear clue that the what's "in the mirror" is fake and not a reflection of what we ave in this room. take a look at the samsung logo on the phone and you'll notice that the 2 letters s are not mirrored as the rest of the logo and as they should be..

Fake - yes it is! Geesh - David Copperfield
operates on the world of fake because true
magic only happens in the heart. End of story.
This is still one heck of an illusion, very inventive
and the flaws are not so obvious on the first
go through which is all that really matters.
Im laughing myself silly when people say
"its fake". Yeah - hello! Fun illusion & I
loved it. The camera isnt bad either

It's not a Mirror. His feet at the end do NOT line up right. In the reflectionm, his left foot is out front, which would mean in the real workd , it would be his right foot thats out front, but when the camera shows his feet in the real world, it's his left foot thats out front. It doesnem't line up they way it would looking in a mirror...simple

Folks, many of you are not getting it... the whole point of this video had nothing to do with illusion or not.

That the quality of the image was good enough for you all to go by frame by frame and see all of these details... was.

Anyone paying attention to the thread (and others like it on the web) know that the images produced by the camera must be damn good..

VERY Well played ad

I just want to know how Sooz would do it.