Jump to content
Ghost_MH

What color is this dress? Tell me I'm not crazy...

Recommended Posts

Okay guys I know this is going to blow your mind but your brain uses context to determine the coloration of things. As a color blind person I'm pretty familiar with this as it's something that's become more acute for me to compensate (the ability to determine color based on nearby clues). In this situation I guarantee it's the difference between what you grew up taking your color cues from.

A and B are the same color below, but that's hard to see because your brain is coloring things based on local cues:

checkershadow_illusion4med.jpg

For the record the OP is white/gold to me but I also noticed the blue/black coloration when scrolling fast or squinting .. i.e. a situation where I am not using my normal color cues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says the person who thinks you can become a virgin again.

My logic is fine, the dress, as shown in this picture is clearly light blue and gold. The picture I made proves this, the picture you posted proves this.

You understand that the actual dress is blue and black right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time my wife showed me that last night it was clearly black and blue. I then went off to play a soccer game and checked facebook and suddenly the dress was white and gold. This morning when I woke up I saw black and blue. And then now I'm seeing white and gold. To me it has everything to do with what angle I first glance at the dress. I've been able to move the image around and have it jump from black/blue to white/gold instantly. Fun stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

va9quvo1bdcjo7qzmby2.jpg

what colors do you see on the left dress and the right dress

IT'S BLUE AND BLACK PEOPLE

blind ass motherfuckers

Regardless of whether the dresses are the same in reality, in the images presented, the left is blue and black and the right is off-white blue (as in greater mixture of R and G and higher overall values) and gold-brown. The two images have objectively different color distributions, you blind ass motherfucker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the most hilarious and annoying thing I have seen in a while :lol:

Different monitors mixed with poopy uneven lighting and poor picture quality make for epic battles :sun:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol I see blue and black and have every time since I first saw it. I figure I'm probably just blessed with more accurate visual algorithms than other people. I see through the optical illusion. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care and every person in my Facebook feed that posts about the dress will be removed bye @kittykat :P

All i know it's one ugly dress

And I need new friends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's s black and blue dress where the black looks faded to brown because of lighting or exposure.

It's weird because I see even trained ophthalmologists giving explanations that I am not really confident in because it seems to work without the objective fact that this dress is, by all accounts, definitely blue and black.

Even the picture of the dress is clearly blue upon close inspection via google or a paint program. Light blue isn't off white.....it's blue. The picture appears light blue because it's a picture of a, in reality, dark blue dress.

It seems to me that this debate also preys upon differing opinions of what gold is. I picture gold as....well, gold. Yellowish gold. But technically gold can go all the way to a darkish tan color. Which makes it more ambiguous that the faded black, which looks brown, can then be argued to be "gold".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White and gold. The wife sees blue and black. Tensions are high here.

Your brain lies to you about color and different people's brains lie differently. That's really all that this is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what fucking universe would you take the sample from where the least amount of light is? The paint on my walls is white, but no shit the parts in the shade are a whole lot darker.

So yes, you are correct, I took samples from the best lit parts of the picture, as any sane and rational human would. Yes, if I go for the worse samples, you do get darker colors, more specifically, darker shades of light blue and fucking gold, as the picture you posted shows.

The parts I used are front and fucking center. Not off to the side, not at the bottom, not the parts where the tit jacket is casting a shadow on. Objectively, the true color of the picture is where my samples are from.

The lighter parts of a surface are not the true color of a surface because more light bounces off it and hits your eye therefore the surface appears hotter or brighter, the only way to get the real color of something is to remove light and shadow using only diffuse light.

In short: Photoshop and Gimp are unscientific means because the source material has already been contaminated with light, you can't umcontaminate it without knowing what it's like in person and using a light meter.

@Scape Zero

What you're doing is sampling the reflection of light, it's like getting a black car photo and sampling the highlight and calling it white. Not to mention that the exposure of the photo is off (note the background) and there is artificial pixelated noise.

Now before someone says that a car is a bad example because clothes don't reflect light, this isn't true, cars just have a tighter and hotter highlight (cosine and specular) than clothing. Flash photography shoots light at a subject then bounces it back to the lens making the specular and cosine properties of things like clothing more extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edshu beheld in either field a farmer at work and proposed to play the two a turn. He donned a hat that was on the one side red but on the other white, green before and black behind; so that when the two friendly farmers had gone home to their village and the one had said to the other, "Did you see that old fellow go by today in the white hat?" the other replied, "Why, the hat was red." To which the first retorted, "It was not; it was white." "But it was red," insisted the friend, "I saw it with my own two eyes." "Well, you must be blind," declared the first. "You must be drunk," rejoined the other. And so the argument developed and the two came to blows. When they began to knife fight each other, they were brought by neighbors before the headman for judgment. Edshu was among the crowd at the trial, and when the headman sat at a loss to know where justice lay, the old trickster revealed himself, made known his prank, and showed the hat. "The two could not help but quarrel," he said. "I wanted it that way. Spreading strife is my greatest joy."
-The Hero With A Thousand Faces

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, @Scape Zero what's the deal with peppering your posts with seemingly random profanity? It really doesn't make your arguments any more convincing and it tends to make you seem like a little kid trying to seem edgy. No offense, I just personally find it kind of off putting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, all last night and all this morning it was clearly gold and white (ya know, a cool white because of the shadows/white balance), but I just pulled the image back up and a flip just switched in my head. It's black and blue. I know what the RGB values say in Photoshop, but it looks like an overexposed black under a warm light. Whereas before it was clearly gold to me.

This is really bizarre, and I can't get back to how I originally saw it as gold and white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, all last night and all this morning it was clearly gold and white (ya know, a cool white because of the shadows/white balance), but I just pulled the image back up and a flip just switched in my head. It's black and blue. I know what the RGB values say in Photoshop, but it looks like an overexposed black under a warm light. Whereas before it was clearly gold to me.

This is really bizarre, and I can't get back to how I originally saw it as gold and white.

Photoshop RGB values are useless in this argument as explained in my previous post. It's showing the accurate incorrect colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many factors at play here. As a photographer, let me dive in:

1) Colour temperature of photo - When you take a picture, cameras will change the colour temperature to automatically try to make things look the right colour based on the lighting source (for consumer cameras anyway, SLRs will let you choose manually). If you take a picture under a tungsten light and then daylight, white will look gold in the former and blue in the latter. A professional would colour-correct in lightroom or photoshop, but a cell phone would not.

2) Colour temperature of monitor - Your monitor can also change the colour of things posted. My work monitor makes the image look more white and gold, but with a blue-ish colour temp. But my home monitor (calibrated for image retouching, etc, and with a full colour gamut) shows a much richer blue and a deep brown, as if it's a blue and black that have been overexposed...which leads to -

3) Exposure - I can make a white horse look black and a black horse look white based on exposure. Exposure is basically how much light is allowed to hit the sensor. So if you over-expose an image, then things become washed out and lighter, as is happening in this image. You can tell the image is over-exposed because the sunlight in the background is blown out rather than being balanced. The dress should be much darker, basically.

So, having said these 3 things, the likeliest explanation is that this is a blue and black dress (more likely a really dark grey than black) that has been over-exposed along with colour-corrected to the warm end. So the blue begins to look white, and the dark grey/black begins to look brown/gold.

This dress appears to come in 2 styles: blue and black, and white and black. It has to be the former, as if it was white and black then the black would look bluer, not yellower. This is because if you colour correct the temperature to the cooler side (white turns to blue) then the black would also turn more blue. To make the black/dark grey brown/gold you'd also have to make the white look very yellow.

So this dress must (by the rules of images and light) be a blue with a dark grey/black lace.

This is all assuming someone hasn't manipulated anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QZ8cUU.png

:lol:

Vox seems to be going with the explanation of the brain making assumptions on lighting which is responsible for the brain fuck caused by the picture Anathema posted earlier. This seems more likely to me then the "cones" argument I have seen from an ophthalmologist, but it leaves me puzzled why this picture would fool so many in terms of lighting since the right of the picture has more bloom effect than an out of control 360 game. It's pretty clearly a well light picture.

They also have a vine that, if not doctored, shows explicitly how gold and white can be transformed into black and blue with a little lighting change. Which, to me, is most interesting in the fact that it shows how adapt our brains are at making these adjustments. The optical illusion of fooling your brain with different shades of grey is one thing. But that our brains subconsciously interpret that gold and white can be perceived from black and blue due to lighting changes are color connections I wouldn't even make if I thought about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Vox is terrible

2) Yes, in Photography, Art, Design, Games, Movies, et cetera people use this all the time. There's no voodoo, just a bad photo of a black and blue dress.

3) Black and blue are a fashion faux pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lighter parts of a surface are not the true color of a surface because more light bounces off it and hits your eye therefore the surface appears hotter or brighter, the only way to get the real color of something is to remove light and shadow using only diffuse light.

In short: Photoshop and Gimp are unscientific means because the source material has already been contaminated with light, you can't umcontaminate it without knowing what it's like in person and using a light meter.

@Scape Zero

What you're doing is sampling the reflection of light, it's like getting a black car photo and sampling the highlight and calling it white. Not to mention that the exposure of the photo is off (note the background) and there is artificial pixelated noise.

Now before someone says that a car is a bad example because clothes don't reflect light, this isn't true, cars just have a tighter and hotter highlight (cosine and specular) than clothing. Flash photography shoots light at a subject then bounces it back to the lens making the specular and cosine properties of things like clothing more extreme.

Yup exactly. Sampling the lightest and most inaccurate part of the photo is nonsensical.

Also, @Scape Zero what's the deal with peppering your posts with seemingly random profanity? It really doesn't make your arguments any more convincing and it tends to make you seem like a little kid trying to seem edgy. No offense, I just personally find it kind of off putting.

A+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I love how everyone is ignoring the fact that the people involved with taking/posting the photo and who saw the dress irl all say it's black and blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup exactly. Sampling the lightest and most inaccurate part of the photo is nonsensical.

A+

Sampling a photo that is inaccurate and calling it true is most nonsensical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I love how everyone is ignoring the fact that the people involved with taking/posting the photo and who saw the dress irl all say it's black and blue.

The internet / 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I love how everyone is ignoring the fact that the people involved with taking/posting the photo and who saw the dress irl all say it's black and blue.

The issue is not what color the actual dress is, we're far past that point. The issue is how different people can see the same picture and yet perceive different colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×