What color is this dress?
Poll
 | 34 votes (51.51%) | ||
| | 18 votes (27.27%) | ||
| | 5 votes (7.57%) | ||
| | 5 votes (7.57%) | ||
| | 4 votes (6.06%) |
66 members have voted
February 27th, 2015 at 6:40:24 PM
permalink
The title speaks for itself.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
February 27th, 2015 at 6:47:09 PM
permalink
It looks gold and white to me - but if I turn the brightness down and the contrast up, it becomes black and blue.
February 27th, 2015 at 6:51:18 PM
permalink
Black and white. On my phone all I can see is a white box which says image in black.
I am a robot.
February 27th, 2015 at 8:16:32 PM
permalink
I don't get how anybody could say it is white and gold.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
February 27th, 2015 at 8:18:32 PM
permalink
I see black and blue, however, I have seen pictures with the resolution or lighting adjusted and then I don't even see gold, I see white and brown
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 27th, 2015 at 9:16:31 PM
permalink
Ice blue white and copper. Hard to tell in the shade.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
February 27th, 2015 at 9:49:57 PM
permalink
Blue and gold, no other colors.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 27th, 2015 at 9:53:18 PM
permalink
On my phone, looks white and gold.
The one I saw on Facebook on my computer was blue & black.
Read an article on it, and basically different people see it differently, even on the same screen at the same time.
The one I saw on Facebook on my computer was blue & black.
Read an article on it, and basically different people see it differently, even on the same screen at the same time.
February 27th, 2015 at 10:02:11 PM
permalink
Gold and probably some kind of white in shadow.
February 27th, 2015 at 10:02:28 PM
permalink
looks like brown and white/pearl however you can assume it has gold sequences.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
February 27th, 2015 at 10:11:38 PM
permalink
This explains it. http://www.buzzfeed.com/virginiahughes/why-are-people-seeing-different-colors-in-that-damn-dress
It's actually blue and black, still looks dark gold to me.
It's actually blue and black, still looks dark gold to me.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 27th, 2015 at 10:12:59 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardI don't get how anybody could say it is white and gold.
72% of people voted white and gold. It's
blue and black.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 27th, 2015 at 10:25:22 PM
permalink
I change my mind.
I'm OK with Corps which pick and choose clienteles. Both insurance companies and casinos have the right to pick and choose customers. They may keep profitable ones and kicked out the rest. But, I'm not OK with a casino supervisor who says counting cards... is like stealing food from a buffet (a foodlifting offense), or video-taping a movie in a cinema (a piracy offense).
February 28th, 2015 at 1:26:36 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI don't get how anybody could say it is white and gold.
I first saw this on TV Friday morning, and at that time I couldn't see how it could be anything other than white and gold.
I rewound it and watched it again, in disbelief that there was even a controversy over it.
But then I happened to look at the bright sunlight in the upper-right, observing the dress out of the corner of my eye, and that's when I saw it as blue. I can still see it as white and gold if I try hard enough.
It reminds me of the Checker Shadow Illusion, where squares A and B have the exact same surface color:
February 28th, 2015 at 4:48:45 AM
permalink
Yeah, the original image is changing. I think it is several different pictures in different lighting conditions or exposure/photoshop filters/development time on rotation. Anyway, there are a few ways to do it.
February 28th, 2015 at 5:54:00 AM
permalink
This is running around the internet my GF just showed me on her phone, she sees blue and black, I can't see any blue whatsoever.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
February 28th, 2015 at 6:01:56 AM
permalink
It's white and gold to me, blue and black to my wife.
The xkcd webcomic has a great image ( http://xkcd.com/1492/ ) that illustrates the blue/black/white/gold illusion nicely.
The dresses on the left and the right are the same colour (I tested it in paint).
The xkcd webcomic has a great image ( http://xkcd.com/1492/ ) that illustrates the blue/black/white/gold illusion nicely.
The dresses on the left and the right are the same colour (I tested it in paint).
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
February 28th, 2015 at 7:52:44 AM
permalink
Quote: JBIt reminds me of the Checker Shadow Illusion, where squares A and B have the exact same surface color:
Yes, JB, I have seen such illusions before, but the image that you posted just doesn't work. I duplicated it and pasted one copy adjacent to the other to see whether the A and B squares matched or not. Clearly, they don't. I have done nothing to change the image, just copy and paste.
Or do we have another What-Color-Dress controversy here?
Edit: I went back to the original, enlarged image from Wiki here, and the two squares in that image don't match at all when laid right next to each other. It looks more as if either they screwed up or that they have a bogus article. Which would you expect from Wiki?
February 28th, 2015 at 10:07:24 AM
permalink
Hi Doc,
Areas A and B ARE the same color in both JB's image and with the link you provided.
(1) I downloaded that image from the Wiki page (filename is Grey_square_optical_illusion.png) and then opened it up in my favorite graphics program and compared the two areas. The match perfectly. (Both have RGB attributes of R119, G119, B119.)
(2) I also then made a screen capture of the image JB posted above, directly from that post and compared those squares. They also match up perfectly.
So I'm not sure what you're doing wrong.
Areas A and B ARE the same color in both JB's image and with the link you provided.
(1) I downloaded that image from the Wiki page (filename is Grey_square_optical_illusion.png) and then opened it up in my favorite graphics program and compared the two areas. The match perfectly. (Both have RGB attributes of R119, G119, B119.)
(2) I also then made a screen capture of the image JB posted above, directly from that post and compared those squares. They also match up perfectly.
So I'm not sure what you're doing wrong.
February 28th, 2015 at 10:10:20 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobThis explains it. http://www.buzzfeed.com/virginiahughes/why-are-people-seeing-different-colors-in-that-damn-dress
It's actually blue and black, still looks dark gold to me.
Thanks for posting that link. Here's a similar article:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/simplest-scientific-explanation-why-people-163307018.html
February 28th, 2015 at 10:10:51 AM
permalink
Quote: AxelWolfThis is running around the internet
To an alarming extent.
I've not seen something so mundane garner such interest before. I mean, it's everywhere . Every sub-group of friends, every web site, every single place I turn, someone is talking about "the dress".
The dress.
The dress.
The only thing more alarming than the interest it's garnered is my reaction to it. There's something about the level of interest coupled with its simplicity and lack of importance that has really stirred something dark inside me.
It's an optical illusion. It should be "amazing" to children under 5. To most others, it should be something you giggle about, say "hey, neat", and forget about within a minute. But no. Days and pages and debates without end. Why? Seriously, somebody needs to explain this to me.
Perhaps a fan of psychology can explain why stuff like this makes me want to lash out at people with intent to harm. Somebody notify DorothyGale.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
February 28th, 2015 at 10:30:53 AM
permalink
Quote: FaceTo an alarming extent.
I've not seen something so mundane garner such interest before. I mean, it's everywhere . Every sub-group of friends, every web site, every single place I turn, someone is talking about "the dress".
The dress.
The dress.
The only thing more alarming than the interest it's garnered is my reaction to it. There's something about the level of interest coupled with its simplicity and lack of importance that has really stirred something dark inside me.
It's an optical illusion. It should be "amazing" to children under 5. To most others, it should be something you giggle about, say "hey, neat", and forget about within a minute. But no. Days and pages and debates without end. Why? Seriously, somebody needs to explain this to me.
Perhaps a fan of psychology can explain why stuff like this makes me want to lash out at people with intent to harm. Somebody notify DorothyGale.
Maybe there's an upside. I'm not on Facebook but my wife is and I sometimes see the page when she leaves it up. Since the dress has appeared, I have noticed a decline in photos of peoples breakfast, lunch, drinks etc. At least there's that.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
February 28th, 2015 at 10:58:25 AM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsSo I'm not sure what you're doing wrong.
So, Ed, just how did you determine that I am the one doing something wrong? ;-)
Let's try it with these few steps. First, when you look at my post on the previous page, do the side-by-side A and B blocks look the same color/tone to you? If so, the answer is either that you and I have very different color/tone perceptions or that our computers display things very differently.
If you can see the difference that I was trying to report, then we should try it again using your post in which you attempted to show that the two blocks are the same color. I made a screen capture of a portion of your post. Then, I enlarged that image and positioned it on top of your post. I enlarged it so that the copied version of block B would overlap both your original block B and block A. I made a screen capture of that overlay and present it behind the spoiler button below.
To me, the enlarged copy of block B matches the tone of the original block B but is lighter than the tone of the original block A. Is that the way it looks to you? The answer to those questions might help us determine whether it is individual perceptions, computer displays, copy techniques, or whatever.
February 28th, 2015 at 11:44:33 AM
permalink
In your initial post, when you posted square B over square A, square A's color attributes were no longer Red 119, Green 119, Blue 119, as square B's were. Instead, square A's attributes were now all over the place. (70 near the top of the image varying to 115 or so towards the bottom of the image.)
This is what I meant by "doing something wrong. Somehow or somewhere along the line, you altered square A's attributes. The entire square should contain pixels that have all the same RGB value, of 119.
In your most recent post (with the spoiler tab above), both square A and square B now have different colors/shades than my original image.
Square B is close to the original... RGB of 118 each. But square A is again all over the place. (Some of the individual pixels have an RGB as low as 98 each, up to 121 or so.)
So to answer your questions...
... no, the side-by-side of your A and B blocks from your original post do not look the same color/tone to me... and that's because they are indeed different.
.. and yes, square B of your enlarged copy of my post does indeed look lighter than block A... again because it is, as confirmed when you look at the individual RBG values of these pixels.
So somehow... in the act you screen grabbing them and/or enlarging them and/or saving them from wiki... the pixel attributes are getting messed up, is my first guess. (Unintentionally, of course.) It's not computer monitors or simply perception.... it's the actual pixels themselves.
Question: At any point by chance are you saving the files as JPG files? If so, that's probably it. Repeat your steps but this time try saving them as PNG files. (The JPG algorithm is one of uses a lossy compression. PNG uses a lossless compression, which is what we need here.)
Let me know because now I'm curious!!!
This is what I meant by "doing something wrong. Somehow or somewhere along the line, you altered square A's attributes. The entire square should contain pixels that have all the same RGB value, of 119.
In your most recent post (with the spoiler tab above), both square A and square B now have different colors/shades than my original image.
Square B is close to the original... RGB of 118 each. But square A is again all over the place. (Some of the individual pixels have an RGB as low as 98 each, up to 121 or so.)
So to answer your questions...
... no, the side-by-side of your A and B blocks from your original post do not look the same color/tone to me... and that's because they are indeed different.
.. and yes, square B of your enlarged copy of my post does indeed look lighter than block A... again because it is, as confirmed when you look at the individual RBG values of these pixels.
So somehow... in the act you screen grabbing them and/or enlarging them and/or saving them from wiki... the pixel attributes are getting messed up, is my first guess. (Unintentionally, of course.) It's not computer monitors or simply perception.... it's the actual pixels themselves.
Question: At any point by chance are you saving the files as JPG files? If so, that's probably it. Repeat your steps but this time try saving them as PNG files. (The JPG algorithm is one of uses a lossy compression. PNG uses a lossless compression, which is what we need here.)
Let me know because now I'm curious!!!
February 28th, 2015 at 1:00:05 PM
permalink
Quote: 1BBI have noticed a decline in photos of peoples breakfast, lunch, drinks etc. At least there's that.
Doesn't that drive you nuts? I have
several people in the extended fam
that constantly posts pic of food
when they go out to eat. Like a
burger is the highlight of their day.
It's a very sad commentary on the
times we live in.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 28th, 2015 at 1:32:30 PM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsQuestion: At any point by chance are you saving the files as JPG files? If so, that's probably it. Repeat your steps but this time try saving them as PNG files. (The JPG algorithm is one of uses a lossy compression. PNG uses a lossless compression, which is what we need here.)
Let me know because now I'm curious!!!
Matter of fact I did convert the image to a .jpg file! However, that is not the full explanation.
When I do a screen capture, I get a .tiff file as my original file to work with. I have tried to post .tiff files here, but those don't appear to be compatible with the [img] command on this site. I had to convert to something different in order to post it here, and I chose .jpg because I have linked to a lot of them here.
I suppose I could have converted it to a .png file. Instead of doing that now, though, I have examined the .tiff file that I started with showing the side-by-side A & B squares. They don't look at all alike in that original screen capture. If converting to .png made them look the same, I would consider that the source of a problem -- would that be my problem or yours? I thought a .tiff file was a good copy of a screen image.
February 28th, 2015 at 1:56:39 PM
permalink
Hmmmm... I thought TIFFs were also lossless, like PNGs and GIFs, and if so, that would have been fine.
However, I just checked. According to a source or two online, they can be both lossy and lossless. It depends upon the settings.
However, I just checked. According to a source or two online, they can be both lossy and lossless. It depends upon the settings.
February 28th, 2015 at 2:19:59 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBob
It's a very sad commentary on the
times we live in.
It's creepy and disturbing. Not the food porn, that's just strange. But the scale of people who can be consumed by the mundane shocks me to the core.
Like, I have sub-groups within this large group I call "friends". Each sub-group gets in a tizzy now and then. My sports friends were all fantasizing about McDavid. My racing friends were all laughing at Kvapil's car being stolen. My outdoorsman friends are all deep into ice fishing. The new moms posting about developments only interesting to them. Hippies raging about fracking and vaccines. Hockey friends preparing for playoffs. Music friends readying for spring time performances...
A place for everything and everything in its place. It's the same old story, same old song and dance, and everyone's unremarkable life carries on their individual unremarkable path.
Then this. The Dress. And every single person is enraptured by it. The goons are arguing with the new moms, the gunners are arguing with the hippies,and everyone is involved. Every single site I've gone to, there's a thread or a clip or a breakdown of The Dress. It's on humor sites, news sites, gambling sites, conspiracy sites, social media...
WHY?! And why do things like this make me want to start knocking people's heads together?
I think I've found the key to my coup. All I need do is combine the group idiocy of the ice bucket challenge and somehow meld it with a cat video, and I could usurp the throne, assume power, and do so with no resistance whatsoever. You wouldn't even realize a thing has happened.
*The opinions expressed herein are likely influenced by PCS*
=p
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
February 28th, 2015 at 2:34:01 PM
permalink
That's the thing, Face -- it's not some optical illusion or some trick. People actually do see it differently.
Isn't it nice, everyone getting together on the same level discussing the same thing? Don't get me wrong, I love cat videos as much as the next average Joe.....but I think this dress has brought all of us closer together.
Quote:The goons are arguing with the new moms, the gunners are arguing with the hippies,and everyone is involved.
Isn't it nice, everyone getting together on the same level discussing the same thing? Don't get me wrong, I love cat videos as much as the next average Joe.....but I think this dress has brought all of us closer together.
February 28th, 2015 at 2:43:16 PM
permalink
Quote: FaceBut the scale of people who can be consumed by the mundane shocks me to the core.
I dunno, it's kind of cool. Not that long
ago news only came from newspapers
and it took forever to get to everybody.
That's in my wife's parents lifetime,
they were born before broadcast radio.
Now we have items like the dress thing
being known in a couple days by 75%
of the planet. That's pretty awesome.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 28th, 2015 at 2:54:02 PM
permalink
Quote: RSThat's the thing, Face -- it's not some optical illusion or some trick. People actually do see it differently.
Maybe it's me, then. With my eye problems, I always see colors differently. Differently from others, and also differently depending on its surroundings. Maybe it's just a case of something actually shocking to most, whereas I've experienced exactly this for my whole life.
Quote: EvenBobI dunno, it's kind of cool. Not that long
ago news only came from newspapers
and it took forever to get to everybody.
That's in my wife's parents lifetime,
they were born before broadcast radio.
Now we have items like the dress thing
being known in a couple days by 75%
of the planet. That's pretty awesome.
Between you and RS, you have me convinced. I'm gonna take my own advice and just shut up until my head has cleared.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
March 1st, 2015 at 9:17:25 AM
permalink
Seems obvious to me the dress is photographed in the shadows, making the white parts gray, perhaps light blue to some folks, and the gold darker than it would be out in the sunlight. Do those 25% people who see blue and black take it too literally, and not grasp the lighting situation? Do those people think when milk is poured from a clear glass into a blue plastic cup, the milk is now blue?
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
March 1st, 2015 at 9:33:52 AM
permalink
I see white and gold. And I have stared at this picture for probably 30 minutes to try and see it the other way... and I totally can't.
March 1st, 2015 at 10:02:56 AM
permalink
What color is it? Ugly. Ugly as hell. That's what color it is.
A falling knife has no handle.
March 1st, 2015 at 11:51:17 AM
permalink
It looks white and gold to me. But I wouldn't be so much interested in the color of the dress as what is in the dress.
"Quit trying your luck and start trying your skill." Mickey Crimm
March 1st, 2015 at 11:57:22 AM
permalink
Quote: zippyboySeems obvious to me the dress is photographed in the shadows, making the white parts gray, perhaps light blue to some folks, and the gold darker than it would be out in the sunlight. Do those 25% people who see blue and black take it too literally, and not grasp the lighting situation? Do those people think when milk is poured from a clear glass into a blue plastic cup, the milk is now blue?
Ha... the dress is actually black and blue. There's a lot of pictures of 'the dress' in better lighting.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
March 1st, 2015 at 12:34:08 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitHa... the dress is actually black and blue. There's a lot of pictures of 'the dress' in better lighting.
Oh is it? Where the black? Where's the blue?
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
March 1st, 2015 at 1:16:48 PM
permalink
Quote: zippyboyQuote: thecesspitHa... the dress is actually black and blue. There's a lot of pictures of 'the dress' in better lighting.
Oh is it? Where the black? Where's the blue?
Light blue and copper/gold.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
March 1st, 2015 at 2:22:32 PM
permalink
I bet you say that to all the guys.Quote: RS.but I think this dress has brought all of us closer together.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
March 1st, 2015 at 2:25:02 PM
permalink
VERY light hint of blue, copper/ gold is exactly what I see.Quote: EvenBobQuote: zippyboyQuote: thecesspitHa... the dress is actually black and blue. There's a lot of pictures of 'the dress' in better lighting.
Oh is it? Where the black? Where's the blue?
Light blue and copper/gold.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
March 1st, 2015 at 2:49:03 PM
permalink
This is the blue I see.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
March 1st, 2015 at 3:50:18 PM
permalink
At first when this thing started blowing up I thought it was a joke. It's black and blue. How can anyone see white and gold?!
Then I saw a million stories on TV about how we see and interpret colors differently. I think it's an interesting phenomenon.
Here's a fascinating article about the color blue:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-blue-and-how-do-we-see-color-2015-2
Then I saw a million stories on TV about how we see and interpret colors differently. I think it's an interesting phenomenon.
Here's a fascinating article about the color blue:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-blue-and-how-do-we-see-color-2015-2
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
March 2nd, 2015 at 6:35:41 AM
permalink
I'm not sure what the original colors are but the picture that's been posted hereQuote: ams288At first when this thing started blowing up I thought it was a joke. It's black and blue. How can anyone see white and gold?!
Then I saw a million stories on TV about how we see and interpret colors differently. I think it's an interesting phenomenon.
Here's a fascinating article about the color blue:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-blue-and-how-do-we-see-color-2015-2
are definitely not BLACK.
I'm sure it's light blue and brown pixels or whatever you call them.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
March 2nd, 2015 at 7:00:00 AM
permalink
It has to do with a couple of things...
1) The lighting at which you view the photo.
2) How good the cones around your retina are.
If you saw the dress as white/gold, try going in to a very well lit room with a lot of available lighting and viewing the dress again on a nice big screen. I'll bet you'll at least see the blue now =). Changing the lighting, I can see the dress as both black/blue and white/gold.
1) The lighting at which you view the photo.
2) How good the cones around your retina are.
If you saw the dress as white/gold, try going in to a very well lit room with a lot of available lighting and viewing the dress again on a nice big screen. I'll bet you'll at least see the blue now =). Changing the lighting, I can see the dress as both black/blue and white/gold.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
March 2nd, 2015 at 8:13:13 AM
permalink
When this circulated my office last Friday, I was the only one to say the dress is blue & black. I thought they were setting me up for some "idiot test" gotcha. I was just perplexed that we honestly did not see the same thing.
I wonder if the phrasing of the question has something to do with it. "What color is this dress?" is quite different from "What colors do you see in this dress?" I guess my brain says, "That dress is blue and black, regardless of what the eyes think." But no matter how I try, I cannot see even a smidgen of white or gold in that dress!
I must say that I do feel a sense of smug vindication in the that, according to those who have worn/seen the dress in person (sorry, I can't find the link), the dress is indeed actually blue & black! :)
To Face's point, I'll pose this analogy: it's like asking, "Does gravity pull objects down, or push them up?" and getting a 2:3 divided response. Colors, like gravity, are (at least perceived as) fundamentally universal. I view the "white & gold" crowd with the same head-scratching incredulity as I would a "gravity pushes up" crowd. The one side cannot believe how the other side can be so "wrong" about something so fundamental to all our lives. Therein lies the fervor.
I wonder if the phrasing of the question has something to do with it. "What color is this dress?" is quite different from "What colors do you see in this dress?" I guess my brain says, "That dress is blue and black, regardless of what the eyes think." But no matter how I try, I cannot see even a smidgen of white or gold in that dress!
I must say that I do feel a sense of smug vindication in the that, according to those who have worn/seen the dress in person (sorry, I can't find the link), the dress is indeed actually blue & black! :)
To Face's point, I'll pose this analogy: it's like asking, "Does gravity pull objects down, or push them up?" and getting a 2:3 divided response. Colors, like gravity, are (at least perceived as) fundamentally universal. I view the "white & gold" crowd with the same head-scratching incredulity as I would a "gravity pushes up" crowd. The one side cannot believe how the other side can be so "wrong" about something so fundamental to all our lives. Therein lies the fervor.
"Dealer has 'rock'... Pay 'paper!'"
March 2nd, 2015 at 8:26:56 AM
permalink
Gravity pulls objects to the center of mass. When these objects hit an obstacle (such as the ground - for something falling from the sky) there is a normal force created, from the ground itself, which pushes back against the object, keeping it from just shooting in to the earth until it reaches the core. Gravity and the Normal Force are two separate things.
Thus, there's ultimately only one answer to the question of what color(s) the dress is. All others are simply a product of visual distorts (lighting, poorer eye sight, etc).
Thus, there's ultimately only one answer to the question of what color(s) the dress is. All others are simply a product of visual distorts (lighting, poorer eye sight, etc).
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
March 2nd, 2015 at 8:41:39 AM
permalink
Quote: RomesGravity pulls objects to the center of mass. When these objects hit an obstacle (such as the ground - for something falling from the sky) there is a normal force created, from the ground itself, which pushes back against the object, keeping it from just shooting in to the earth until it reaches the core. Gravity and the Normal Force are two separate things.
I agree with what you have said, but I was referring to a response to the question posed the general populace (most of whom wouldn't know what a normal force is). Perhaps I should rephrase. "Will this brick "fall" down to the floor or up towards the ceiling when I release it?"
To which, 100% of the populace would say it falls down to the ground. But what would you think if 60% of the people said it would "fall" up to the ceiling?
Quote:Thus, there's ultimately only one answer to the question of what color(s) the dress is. All others are simply a product of visual distorts (lighting, poorer eye sight, etc).
But there is more to it than that. Two people with the same visual acuity look at the same picture (with the flawed lighting, etc.) and say two different things. I think the brain's response to the information provided by the eyes is the difference. And that is what is intriguing.
"Dealer has 'rock'... Pay 'paper!'"
March 2nd, 2015 at 9:19:23 AM
permalink
Quote: JoemanBut there is more to it than that. Two people with the same visual acuity look at the same picture (with the flawed lighting, etc.) and say two different things. I think the brain's response to the information provided by the eyes is the difference. And that is what is intriguing.
Of course I can't find the article I read about this... Basically, in the article they disagreed with this statement. If 2 people have the same visual acuity and look at the picture in the same lighting, they should see the same thing. If they see different colors then one of the two items above was different (either lighting or visual acuity).
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
March 2nd, 2015 at 3:05:07 PM
permalink
In real life the dress may be blue and black, but not what is posted here. Take the picture and add it to paint, then click the eyedropper on any pixel, it will match the color you can then click edit color and it will give you the exact colors. You get blues and browns.Quote: JoemanWhen this circulated my office last Friday, I was the only one to say the dress is blue & black. I thought they were setting me up for some "idiot test" gotcha. I was just perplexed that we honestly did not see the same thing.
I wonder if the phrasing of the question has something to do with it. "What color is this dress?" is quite different from "What colors do you see in this dress?" I guess my brain says, "That dress is blue and black, regardless of what the eyes think." But no matter how I try, I cannot see even a smidgen of white or gold in that dress!
I must say that I do feel a sense of smug vindication in the that, according to those who have worn/seen the dress in person (sorry, I can't find the link), the dress is indeed actually blue & black! :)
To Face's point, I'll pose this analogy: it's like asking, "Does gravity pull objects down, or push them up?" and getting a 2:3 divided response. Colors, like gravity, are (at least perceived as) fundamentally universal. I view the "white & gold" crowd with the same head-scratching incredulity as I would a "gravity pushes up" crowd. The one side cannot believe how the other side can be so "wrong" about something so fundamental to all our lives. Therein lies the fervor.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
March 2nd, 2015 at 3:17:05 PM
permalink
Trivia Time!
Which color is the human eye the most sensitive to? In other words, which color can it detect the smallest changes in hue?
For extra credit -- why?
Fans of the TV series Fargo need not respond.
Which color is the human eye the most sensitive to? In other words, which color can it detect the smallest changes in hue?
For extra credit -- why?
Fans of the TV series Fargo need not respond.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
