The blue is absolutely blue and the black is more muddled but still looks dark enough to just be black.
http://mobile.digitalartsonline.co....t-dress-actually-is-using-photoshop-its-blue/
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Optical Illusion Thread: The lines you see are perfectly straight.
- Thread starter Malyse
- Start date
The blue is absolutely blue and the black is more muddled but still looks dark enough to just be black.
http://mobile.digitalartsonline.co....t-dress-actually-is-using-photoshop-its-blue/
I have tried so many times to explain that to people but yeah that gif sums it up nicely. It's a very cool illusion and I'm 100% sure it's down to what your brain initially interpreted the lighting conditions of the scene to be.
The dress illusion is really insane, as tired of a craze/meme as it is. I know the very first time I saw the image, I was 100% sure it was white and gold. However, I was able to look at it enough to force myself to see he real colors, and now whenever I see it I only see blue and black.
I literally can't see the white and gold anymore. Its a weird feeling, like my mind and perception got permanently rewired!
I literally can't see the white and gold anymore. Its a weird feeling, like my mind and perception got permanently rewired!
See this makes no sense to me, your own evidence clearly shows it is blue.It's clearly white and gold - the white has a blue tint. It's so clearly this that it should not even be allowed to have another opinion. Yeah the lighting could change the dress in real life, but judging solely the image in front of us, it is clearly gold and white (with blue tint).
Evidence:
Blue:
The gif is a joke because the person manually altered the colours as it moves. Jus the original, it's a matter of colours in the image being borked compared to the dress in real life rather than it spontaneously swapping between dark blue + black and white + gold. Check for yourself in paint or photoshop, it's two distinct colours unlike the pillar casting a shadow on a checker board illusion.
Jason Frost
Member
John Caboose
Member
The dress (like the actual physical dress) is black and blue. The subjective perception of the lighting conditions in the image lends itself to several interpretations. Please read my own quoted text below and the link to a scientific study about it.
The image, like the actual RGB pixel data colors when picked out in photoshop, contains shades of very light blue and a kind of goldish brown.
That's what I mean.
I'm pretty mych like this too. The actual colors in the picture (using photoshop color picker to check) is some sort of light blue and a more brownish kind of gold.
It still puzzles me.
If I look at only the small strip of dark area to the extreme left of the image and cover tge other areas I can see it as black and blue, but only then. If I look at the whole left dress I get the effect of it being a blue-tinted white and dark gold dress.
I read somewhere that people who are used to natural vs artificial light see the gold vs black dresses respectively.
Looking at the image above I interpret the lighting conditions as the dark areas being shadows to the light areas normal light. Whereas the people used to artificial lighting see the dark areas as the normal and the light areas as some sort of highlighted area.
Think of being outside in the sun and a shadow coming from a large tree vs being inside in the dark and light coming from a lamp.
Edit: link https://www.google.se/amp/amp.slate...e_s_why_people_saw_the_dress_differently.html
EDIT: I would like to add that of course the screen being used makes a difference. It's easier on my PC (where I'm writing now) to see the black/blue in the anime girl image than on my phone which is where I wrote the quoted post.
So I said the dress was physically black and blue and you said the image wasn't. It's definitely blue and the black is a dark enough brown that it's obviously overexposed black.
So I disagree that the image doesn't show black and blue. It does. The interesting thing is why some people in some conditions are tricked into seeing it wrong.
Dreadnought
Member
White with blue tint? 🤔 Maybe we should have a name for this blueish color
John Caboose
Member
Don't mistake your own subjective perceptions with the objective truth. It's a something we humans do every day.
You should really read the scientific article.
RGB values aren't subjective.
And the additional information of what the dress is in real life also isn't subjective.
The hell are you talking about? The colors stay consistent throughout..
Also, the people that are arguing about what color the dress really is are missing the point. The entire point of the illusion is that people can interpret the image differently based on their unconscious assumptions of the lighting conditions in a shitty photo, not what the dress actually looks like in person.
CertifiedFP
Member
It's literally just unfunny trolling started by some "0MG, SO RANDOM!!!" idiot on Facebook. I can't believe that there were some neurologists that actually took it seriously.
The image below sums up "White and Gold" perfectly.
John Caboose
Member
RGB values aren't subjective. Saying something is "obviously overexposed black" is absolutely subjective. I would like you to at least try and have an open discussion but you seem dead set on misinterpreting my posts. I won't engage further if this is the level of self-justifying posts you are going to make.
Exactly.
The dress has black on it, not gold or white or brown or green. That means that is objectively overexposed black. I'm not self-justifying here, that simply is what it is.
CertifiedFP
Member
"Unconscious assumptions" is new-age hooey.
If you see it as White and Gold, your Retinas are fucked and/or you're colorblind.
Wag
Member
I think I had a stroke.
Ah I see I where I fucked up. It's obvious now but I was taking the colours at the edges, which are clearly distinct instead of in the shaded boxes which are clearly there to show the lighting differences. So yea, my bad I fucked up there.
John Caboose
Member
Selectively quoting "unconscious assumptions" without the "lighting conditions" immediately after is purposeful misrepresentation. I read the entire article linked and to put it mildly adding "scientific" to the headline doesn't make it so. There are 0 sources for any of the info in that article. Please read this instead:
http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...e_s_why_people_saw_the_dress_differently.html
LookAtMeGo
Member
#teamblackandblue
Good thing to know my eyes work.
I can see past most of the optical illusions posted in here except thos "magic eye" photos or whatever they are called. I have never been able to see the images.
Good thing to know my eyes work.
I can see past most of the optical illusions posted in here except thos "magic eye" photos or whatever they are called. I have never been able to see the images.
SlipperyFishes
Banned
Perhapsbthe white point colour of the device screen has an impact?
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
I have only ever seen the image as white (albeit with a blue tint) and gold. Although I've always accepted the dress itself was a different colour the image is objectively light blue and gold. Not anymore.... Fuck everything.
Holy shit thanks. It suddenly completely changed and I couldn't see the rest anymore.
Now I can switch
It's clearly white and gold - the white has a blue tint. It's so clearly this that it should not even be allowed to have another opinion. Yeah the lighting could change the dress in real life, but judging solely the image in front of us, it is clearly gold and white (with blue tint).
Evidence:
It is gold/brown and light blue. That's what your evidence shows. There is no white. Those are the colours in the picture.
The actual dress in real life is black and blue, as others have stated.
GKSilKamina
Member
Same for me. White and gold if I'm wearing my glasses. Black and blue if I take them off.
Thank you. I was losing my mind trying to get her to go counter-clockwise.
Now it's a pale light blue and gold-ish.
DieNgamers
Member
You can't blame anyone who sees white and gold. Even if it isn't – it could very well be white and gold! It's all realitve to (and depends on) the exact lighting conditions.
Imagine the dress being white/gold and close to a window. The cold light from outside would lightit in such a way that it would look exactly like on the photo. On the other hand it can just as well be blue and black, thanks to shitty camera quality and not so brilliant colors on the dress. Edit: I mean that shadows can have the hue of the light source (blue/cold) opposed to the other light source (orange/warm).
There's no universal truth how it should be seen, even though it's blue in real life. In real life it wouldn't look anything like that photo, though.
Extreme ecxample: Matt Smith isn't blue or red, right?
It could just be the same effect, depending on the light source. Nothing wrong with people's eyes who see white and gold.
I don't get this one. The yellow text already looks like the colour on the right before it's moved across. Am I supposed to think it looks like the lighter yellow in the middle?
I really like the checkboard illusion. It's such a simple and effective way to demonstrate that your brain is compensating for shadows when interpreting colour.
It still puzzles me.
That hurts my head more than anything else in the thread. The brain does some amazing post processing to work out colours in shadows and shit, but damn if it can't get confused in edge cases.
The worst for me are the 3d spinning dancers where you have to try reeeeeeaaaallly hard to make it spin the other way.
This one:
I've found the easiest way is to cover everything above the knee, get my brain to see it going the other way, then slowly reveal the rest of the model.
The crazy thing for me isn't that the direction changes, it's that the model itself changes. Switching direction also switches which arm and leg is outstretched, as well as which direction her head is tilted.
John Caboose
Member
I've tried to find the "switch" in my head for this one and it seems easiest to visualize the other direction just looking at the foot and then slowly revealing the rest.
You can't blame anyone who sees white and gold. Even if it isn't it could very well be white and gold! It's all realitve to (and depends on) the exact lighting conditions.
Imagine the dress being white/gold and close to a window. The cold light from outside would lightit in such a way that it would look exactly like on the photo. On the other hand it can just as well be blue and black, thanks to shitty camera quality and not so brilliant colors on the dress. Edit: I mean that shadows can have the hue of the light source (blue/cold) opposed to the other light source (orange/warm).
There's no universal truth how it should be seen, even though it's blue in real life. In real life it wouldn't look anything like that photo, though.
Extreme ecxample: Matt Smith isn't blue or red, right?
It could just be the same effect, depending on the light source. Nothing wrong with people's eyes who see white and gold.
I never said anything different. But the poster I quoted said that the actual colour in the picture is white (with blue tint), which is not white, its light blue. It's not evidence for a white colour. That's all i said.
MikeHattsu
Member
You're still talking about that damn dress? 
Fried Food
Banned
The worst for me are the 3d spinning dancers where you have to try reeeeeeaaaallly hard to make it spin the other way.
This one:
this one is the most "impressive" to me
Monocle
Member
Nope. The video exists for childish people to have their subjective POV validated. Nobody earns points for having the "right" opinion about something as inconsequential as the colors of a dress in an ambiguous photo. Anyone who thinks so has an embarrassing lack of grace and should look inward to find out what's stopping them from thinking like a grown-up.
I see the dress as mostly white and gold, but if you want to see it as black and blue, try covering the background with your fingers or hands (I'm on my phone so I uses my fingers). You'll start to see it as back and blue. I also saw it as black and blue while I was focused at the white soace under the picture and not focused on the dress.
StrategyFan
Member
gif is evil
MikeHattsu
Member
John Caboose
Member
These inverse-face type illusions are super cool. They had some statues in an Uncharted game with inverse faces making it seem like they're looking at you.
Storm Kyleis
Member
Because it's actually an interesting phenomenon, regardless of where it came from.
People saying it's "objectively this way" or "it should not even be allowed to have another opinion" baffle me. The lighting in the picture is ambiguous. We don't have enough information to tell whether it's a white/gold dress with black/blue lighting or a black/blue dress with yellow lighting, so our brain has to guess, and we guess in different ways. Nobody's retinas are fucked.
I see it as white and gold but I'm aware that the bright lighting is tricking me.
onken
Member
Apparently I'm the only person that sees blue and gold??
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
can someone put the spinning girl figure with the helping tool to make her turn counter clockwise please
x ___ x
x ___ x
Maxey
Member
Actually, could someone extract the frames from that gif and see if they don't put reversed frames in there?
You are not.
lol. You're completely wrong.
Just look at the reflection rotating the other way then back up to the model.
Then look at her foot and back up to the model to reverse it.
You can do it every spin if you wish.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll