This may be of interest: LINK
Printable View
This may be of interest: LINK
I don't think people are looking at it under the right lighting conditions.
Here's what it really looks like.
Rik , yours may be multi-coloured, but the one I and my wife see is white and gold. Our children see blue and black.
They do!
Then, I know your children are going to love my new Blue & Black phone.
White and gold. I can't even believe that anyone can see blue and black but I am obviously wrong. Is it a youth thing? Has too much high fructose corn sweetener caused young person's eyes to see negative images?
(Nice one Rik, psychedelic dress)
I thought it might be age related, but this report shows three young guys disagreeing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31655236
This is a bit interesting.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31666458
I showed the image to my son and daughter last night. They thought I was crazy to think it was white and gold. They thought I was even crazier when I suggested the jacket was white.
I see it as a Blue & Black dress and I'm 67 so I don't think it's age related. The science puts it down to the ambient lighting which I can understand, but when it's the same photo (ie not the dress in the real world under different lighting) then why do some see it as White & Gold?
I would strenuously argue (I am six year older) that the dress is white and gold and there is no way it could be otherwise. Whoever hit upon this photo has uncovered something really major. I would be curious to hear was a vision/neurologist had to say about this phenomenon.Quote:
but when it's the same photo (ie not the dress in the real world under different lighting) then why do some see it as White & Gold?
Some people seem to see the darker colors shift when they view using peripheral vision versus looking straight at the photo. To further confuse there is another more over-exposed photo shown in television stories. The Tumbler photo and TV photos are badly over-exposed photos as produced through the camera's confused lighting sensor and the shop's lights (perhaps fluorescent with bluish cast) on the back of the dress and bright daylight in front of the dress.
I only see the black and deep blue colors in the photo on the far right no matter how I shift my gaze.
Interesting analysis Maya. There is no doubt in my mind that lighting effects colors.
Four of us looking at the same image in the same room at the same time are perceiving it in two different ways, so it's not a question of lighting or any other changes causing a different perception in our case.
I've read that about 25% of those polled on it see the black and deep blue version of the Tumbler photo. I never do no matter how I look at it, it always looks like a light blue tone with browns. There is perhaps a physical vision element going on.
Indeed it does!
Another thing to consider, possibly, is the viewing angle with computer monitors. On my laptop screen if I lean off to the side and view it everything turns darker in color. People testing the colors in a group might all try sitting in front of their computer in exactly the same eye level to the screen and see if there's any difference then.
I have, Paul.
And no-one in our house has what might be called poor eyesight, or colour blindness.
And no-one wears glasses.
And the age ranges from 25 to 60.
All agree, when viewing the same image, that the colours are the same as what everyone else sees.
I shall finish in this topic, by posting my Blue and Black phone I just purchased.
Attachment 106406
The mystery continues then.
Rik, where did you get that Turquoise phone from?
The phone is dark blue. Anyone can see that. No?
I hate to break it to you guys but I know for a fact that there were different images circulated, with different light levels. A brilliant piece of marketing which has seen massive interest in the dress and the design label. I visited a marketing company which we are working with and they were discussing this and how to use this type of marketing for some campaigns they were working on. The really funny thing is that there are people out there convinced that some people see blue and some white.
The really funny thing is that there are people out there convinced that some people see blue and some white.
Yes, and I'm one of them.
Then I suppose the marketing has worked. There are three images; the so called white and gold, the lighter blue and brownish black and the real image.
Then I suppose the marketing has worked.
Yes, the three of us looking at the one image, with two opinions, were swayed by the marketing.
The two guys in the BBC report standing near each other looking at an image on an iPad were also swayed by the marketing when they decided the colours were differrent.
mass hysteria in the modern way :)
Here's an article looking at the issue that's worth a read... (ipauland, I believe you)
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/science...s-color-dress/
Indeed.
There are indeed three images circulating. However it doesn't distract or explain how showing just a single image (not 3) to numerous people leads to two very different replies. That's not marketing nor mass hysteria :)Quote:
I hate to break it to you guys but I know for a fact that there were different images circulated
oh yes it is, bearing in mind that the term can be used in various different ways; all trending is a form of mass hysteria in one sense
the way two people see the same picture [given the same viewing conditions] very differently is a known phenomena placed generally on the 'optical illusion' end of the spectrum because that is sort of what it is, except that instead of 'confusing' everyone it only confuses some who's perceptions work in a certain way/ways
it only confuses some who's perceptions work in a certain way/ways
..like the whole of the population. We all perceive things in 'certain ways'.
This suggestion that some of the population are confused because they don't fit a given explanation is bordering offensive.
oh for crying out loud Paul - lighten up - I put 'confused' in inverted commas - the brain gets 'confused' by optical illusions, and this is in that sort of category; it has nothing to do with being confused in the sense of mental capacity
the colours are scientifically assessable - people who are not colour-blind 'should' see them a certain way under given conditions; if they don't and it is not a general thing that happens to them all the time but only for a specific picture, then signals are getting misinterpreted somewhere along the way however you wish to define that
Saw this on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AskAQwOBvhc
Whether this explains it all, I'm not sure.