I was not successful in my tries to contact the guy who posted this on douyin and we still have no idea. I will N/A this.

u can prob n/a this

Has there been any new info on this video? Are we likely to get more at this point?

@EvanDaniel I don't have any new information. I tried registering on douyin to contact the talking poop guy, but I could not achieve that without a Chinese phone number. I worry that we will have to N/A this.

An example of how it could be done with practical effects:

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Q94y1C7uU/?spm_id_from=autoNext

It could be that the narrow depth of field is sufficient to obscure such a wire, but it also could be edited to blur/remove any remaining appearance of a wire as well, so even if this was the method used, it doesn't rule out deceptive editing as well.

炼丹师阿香魔术揭秘_哔哩哔哩_bilibili

-, 视频播放量 18040、弹幕量 3、点赞数 78、投硬币枚数 5、收藏人数 15、转发人数 38, 视频作者 rbt01, 作者简介 ，相关视频：打假炼丹师阿翔，常温超导磁悬浮2，炼丹师阿翔的LK99视频惊现空间扭曲现象，LK-99验证 16倍慢放特写 炼丹师阿翔LK-99材料抗磁性验证，炼丹师阿翔8月5日最新lk-99全悬浮视频，来自 炼丹师阿翔的简单说明，感觉越来越真了，炼丹师阿翔换头像了，一种基于达芬奇剪辑软件复现完美悬浮的发帖方式，室温超导，刚刚看到的一个视频，结果看到一半视频被删除了，赶紧录下来。，炼丹师阿翔LK-99视频，真有意思，炼丹师阿翔LK99头像换为”翔“了

@chrisjbillington The translational motion looks right, the lack of towards/away motion in the original checks out, but the rotational effects in the original aren't on display here and the very slow return to original orientation still seems weird. I think that slow return is weird for both "it's real" and any sort of hidden wire technique, which leads me to keep thinking CGI / editing is at play.

But I am definitely not an expert in video fakery.

@EvanDaniel I think you could achieve the rotational effect by attaching wire at two points (top and bottom)

@chrisjbillington very neat demonstration.
unfortunately, even if the author admits fakery, I would be surprised if they admitted exactly how they faked it, which might mean this market never resolves.

@chrisjbillington https://twitter.com/dmitrybrant/status/1688260271272267776 another demonstration of the same effect. I'm considering updating to a "NO", since imo this or something similar is the most likely way in which the video would be faked, if it were fake.

Shame this market differs between practical and digital effects - that seems to miss the point imo :/

although actually, it's likely that the author would still have to do some slight digital retouching even if the wire is out of focus (@dmitrybryant seemingly did this: "I made this not in a 900°C oven, but in #DaVinciResolve.")

@1111111 for one that doesn't distinguish between types of fakery, see

/chrisjbillington/is-the-latest-video-of-a-supposed-s

Now there are already two videos of the rotating golden poop.

How does it resolve if it's attached to strings that they rotoscoped out?

@Tater Counts as edited, I guess?

@LeonBohnmann in NO you listed ropes which seems the same to me

@Tater Basically if it can be captured directly with a normal camera (from this specific perspective) then it is „NO“.

@LeonBohnmann ah nvm I agree actually

If it is real then that's basically the same as the LK-99 paper replicating, so this seems too low to me

@WilliamHoward There might also be some electromagnetic setup outside the frame. Levitation with AC fields or diamagnets is possible, just not with such a simple setup.

@LeonBohnmann Oh wait duh I didn't read the description properly, my bad

What evidence will be acceptable? If Captain Disillusion or someone plausibly explains how it was done and points to artefacts that back that explanation up, will that be sufficient?

I think the answer to this is definitely YES, but we may never know for sure, so there's not much point betting unless non-definitive evidence will be accepted.

@chrisjbillington I believe a consensus will be found long before the the mid of next year. Your Captain Disillusion would be enough if that video itself is not hugely controversial.

Strings edited out would be YES?

Edit: this is already answered, ignore!

@chrisjbillington Yes

Can you clarify what you mean by "CGI"?

If I have the sample on a support, and edit out the support using premiere, is that "CGI"? (by traditional definitions no - there's no "generated" imagery here, but your description seems to suggest otherwise - "no matter if simple video edit or full scale rendering.")

Might be worth clarifying the title to something like "Has the video of fully floating LK-99 sample been deceitfully edited?"

@1111111 Yeah I meant deceitfully edited or CGI, thanks.