Who remembers this?
-
ITT: people telling other people they're trolling rather than accepting that humans can perceive reality differently, and the own perception is never objective.
"humans can perceive reality differently", yea, that's true, but the thing with the dress picture is that it's so obvious that there is a bright white light, that people doesn't see it, like, never in it's entire life have ever use a flashlight or somelight like that and see how shuch kind of light can get colors brighter. We have the sun, damnit. If the light in the picture were more blue or purple like, the dress would be more darker, BUT! if the dress were actually white and golden/yellow,with the light said before, would be getting the same result, but it's not the case.
"humans can perceive reality differently", yea, but this is not of one cases
-
Because no one has posted the other photos:
And this is a photo of the same dress taken under proper lighting:
wrote last edited by [email protected]Left: blue and black.
Middle: light blue and black.
Right: dark blue and black.The dress is blue and black. It will never be white or gold. The lighting or saturation doesn't matter.
-
The "white" pixels are literally blue. The "black" ones can be considered gold due to the lighting.
You missed the whole point. If I take a white dress and then shine a blue lamp on it, then take a photo.The pixels will be 100% blue, but would that mean the dress itself is blue?
-
I can't remember the pairs of colors that are supposed to be. Were blue/black and golden/white?
Congratulations, you remembered.
-
This didn’t “reveal differences in human perception”. Those differences were well known already. What was lacking - and still is, as far as I know - is a good model of human colour perception.
I think everyone knew about how human perception subconsciously color corrects a particular image, but this was shocking in that there was genuine disagreement between people who simply couldn't see it the other way.
-
I've only ever seen it as blue and black. I can't force it the other way like I could with Laurel and Yani. Y'all seeing white and gold astound me.
I still think the white and gold people are trolling.
-
I can sort of change it. Probably just my TN monitor though.
wrote last edited by [email protected]This was always the real trick. If you have a laptop you can probably tilt your screen to make it change between the two. What angle you use your screen at affects your perception.
-
When you look at the checker shadow illusion, do you see the pixels as identical in color? If not, then obviously there's more to human perception than just the color of the pixel code.
That is witchcraft.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I found this image to be a really good way to distill the issue down into the two different modes or perception:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress#/media/File:Wikipe-tan_wearing_The_Dress_reduced.svg
-
Don't forget Laurel and Yani!
I hate that one because I hear both of them at the same time Dx feels like pure insanity.
-
No, what happened is that a bunch of people were shown to be objectively wrong about what color it was, and couldn't let it go.
That's a boring description because there's no curiosity why they were wrong
-
Congratulations, you remembered.
its fokin cul
-
This is exactly the thing.
Whatever the dress may be in reality, the photo of it that was circulated was either exposed or twiddled with such that the pixels it's made of are indeed slightly bluish grey trending towards white (i.e. above 50% grey) and tanish browny gold.
That is absolutely not up for debate. Those are the color values of those pixels, end of discussion.
Edit to add: This entire debacle is a fascinating case of people either failing to or refusing to separate the concept of a physical object versus its very inaccurate representation. The photograph of the object is not the object: ce n'est pas une robe.
The people going around in this thread and elsewhere putting people down and calling them "stupid" or whatever else only because they know that the physical dress itself is black and blue based on external information are studiously ignoring the fact that this is not what the photograph of it shows. That's because the photograph is extremely cooked and is not an accurate depiction. The debate only exists at all if one party or the other does not have the complete set of information, and at this point in history now that this stupid meme has been driven into the ground quite thoroughly I should hope that all of us do.
It's true that our brains can and will interpret false color data based on either context or surrounding contrast, and it's possible that somebody deliberately messed with the original image to amplify this effect in the first place. But the fact remains that arguing about what the dress is versus how it's been inaccurately depicted is stupid, and anyone still trying that at this late stage is probably doing so in bad faith.
They're not stupid, their visual cortex just lacks the ability to calibrate to context. You can see in the picture that the scene is very brightly lit. If your visual cortex is in working order, you'll adjust your perception of the colours. The picture reveals that some people struggle to do that.
-
Zuni Gold beans with White Cannellini Beans or Black beans with Nonna Agnes Blue Beans?
I neeeed all the beanz!
-
This post did not contain any content.
oh god not again with this absolutely egocentric bullshit factory..... ugh i hate our society sometimes
-
It appears white/gold to me on it's own, I've never been able to see anything different.
Grabbing this specific image and sampling the colours though; they appear more of a grey/brown colour. I can sorta maybe understand blue, but definitely not black.
This is just using Polish photo editor on android:
You should watch https://youtu.be/bg41XfnIBvk for an explanation on how to properly get the colors from the image.
-
You can literally sample the rgb values and see it's blue and black
Edit: am I part of the joke here??? It's clearly blue and black...
wrote last edited by [email protected]You can sample the colours and see it’s white with a very light blue tinge and gold.
People who see it as blue and black are (correctly in this case) auto-correcting for the yellow light as the dress itself is black and blue.
Whereas people who see it as white and gold are (subconsciously) assuming a blue shadow and seeing the pixels as they’re displayed.
-
"The phenomenon revealed difference in human color perception..."
Yes, you're becoming a part of the joke. People LITERALLY see the dress differently. It doesn't matter what the objective facts are. TBH, it says a lot about humanity. Even when we have evidence that subjective experiences can vary, and even contradict each other, we still end up arguing over whose viewpoint is "correct".
That we’re curious problem solvers?
Anyway, science has determined that my way is most based
A study carried out by Schlaffke et al. reported that individuals who saw the dress as white and gold showed increased activity in the frontal and parietal regions of the brain. These areas are thought to be critical in higher cognition activities such as top-down modulation in visual perception
-
am I part of the joke here??? It's clearly blue and black...
The objective fact is…it is a blue and black dress. Other photos of the same dress show that.
But I cannot, for the life of me, see how anyone can possibly get that from this photo. Sample the RGB values all you want and it clearly is not black in this photo. The exposure and white balance have messed around with it so much it is incomprehensible to me how anyone can see it as blue and black.
Optical illusion innit
-
Not even the brighter version looks white and gold to me. It's so obviously blue and black, y'all are insane.
Zoom in or sample the colours. They’re not blue and black.
