The Dress

[squadops]

I still see a stupid dress

 

[Soundtrack]

It's really hard to reconstruct a light spectrum when only presented with RGB values.

. Maybe something is lost in translation here, but as far as I know Red, Green and Blue primaries where picked because they suited the humanly visible spectrum quite well. Or maybe are you referring to the technical limits of some RGB colorspaces? In such a case upcoming standards like REC 2020 will eventually push back those boundaries.

 

[tarnheld]

What do you see now?
Only corrected the temp by -5 and the exposure by -0.83

My point is how do you come up with these values? Do you have any reason to choose them other than that it makes the dress more blue to you?

Maybe something is lost in translation here, but as far as I know Red, Green and Blue primaries where picked because they suited the humanly visible spectrum quite well. Or maybe are you referring to the technical limits of some RGB colorspaces? In such a case upcoming standards like REC 2020 will eventually push back those boundaries.

There is nothing wrong with RGB primaries, and you are correct that they where chosen because they match human perception. But when you describe a light spectrum -- that is a function of wavelength -- with only three numbers there is loss. Or the other way around: there are many light spectra that can give the same RGB values. Given that the RGB values of the dress photo are a combination of lighting spectrum and dress absorption spectrum, you could easily come up with many different light sources that give the same RGB values when lighting the actual white/gold dress or the blue/black dress. If the police is lucky, they can match the spectra to one of the light sources at the photo's shot location. If the defendant is lucky, all light sources fit or the light source is unknown.

 

[Soundtrack]

Ok there I "see" your point.

While I still find it hard to conceive why the original picture has divided people with almost antinomic interpretations of what the dress should be, I can imagine giving - at camera - a white and gold object the same distorted appearance. It would however require a quite "funky" lightning set up, one I can not imagine suitable for a clothing store.

 

[tarnheld]

While I still find it hard to conceive why the original picture has divided people with almost antinomic interpretations of what the dress should be

I guess the dividedness comes not only from the picture itself, but from the surrounding illumination. I have always seen The Dress as blue/black, but when i watched it in a darkened room (checking GTPlanet while racing online ) i saw it white/gold. Came unexpected, and i kept that impression for a while, even when watching it in a lit place. But now i see it blue/black again, and cannot switch back, even when watching it in darkness. Could be a problem that visual perception glitches easily flip to one side when you 'see it' or better: know the visual trick. Just like the cat in the GT logo.

 

[niky]

Ok there I "see" your point.

While I still find it hard to conceive why the original picture has divided people with almost antinomic interpretations of what the dress should be, I can imagine giving - at camera - a white and gold object the same distorted appearance. It would however require a quite "funky" lightning set up, one I can not imagine suitable for a clothing store.

The problem is that for those of us who go shopping at markets, it looks like a dress inside a clothing store (thus in shadow) taken against an overexposed sunlit background outside the store.

Without further visual cues as to whether the dress is in shadow or in direct sunlight, it's very easy to interpret it as a white dress in the shade on a very sunny day.

-

Again, it goes back to: The original picture was complete garbage.

 

[Monatsende]

Sorry. But my brain decided to "see" the white/gold combo after being striktly fixed on blue/black since the beginning. Stupid hype though.

 

[JR98]

https://twitter.com/PlayStationAU/status/571176841777516544

Hehe...well played Sony.

Even Sony are getting in on the @banter! Off topic: how many posts do you think @banter has been tagged in?

 

[FT-1]

One year after the dress, people got bored of having pointless things to argue over, so now there is a debate over an Adidas jacket!

Don't complain about the source, you clicked on this thread for a reason

 

[Northstar]

It's ugly is what it is.

 

[Pupik]

One year after the dress, people got bored of having pointless things to argue over, so now there is a debate over an Adidas jacket!

Don't complain about the source, you clicked on this thread for a reason

There's only one way to put an end to this: Brabhams.

 

[niky]

The correct answer is: Learn how to white balance... derh.

 

[Ken]

I see green and gold.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

 

[Ken]

I simply find the fact that we all don't see it the same way mildly interesting.

 

[squadops]

Not the infamous God eye deal I hope

 

[Grayfox]

I see dark green and bronze

 

[Nessy]

Light blue and silver. Works computer monitor needs recalibrating.

 

[Sanji Himura]

New illusion from "The Dress" photographer.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...on-how-many-girls-are-actually-in-this-photo/

He actually gives away the solution in this illusion, but I won't tell you what it is.

 

[PureAlpha1206]

New illusion from "The Dress" photographer.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...on-how-many-girls-are-actually-in-this-photo/

He actually gives away the solution in this illusion, but I won't tell you what it is.

First of all... that picture is creepy

Secondly it looks like there four girls in the picture before it meets the mirror to me. Only going on the way that the pattern of the first four girls seems to repeat itself.

EDIT: Just read the answer

Spoiler: ANSWER

I Can't believe it's only 2! I mean I see it now that I know, but that's crazy!

 

[Tired Tyres]

Two is what I thought straight away.

 

[Johnnypenso]

New illusion from "The Dress" photographer.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...on-how-many-girls-are-actually-in-this-photo/

He actually gives away the solution in this illusion, but I won't tell you what it is.

Here's the best comment right here:

Gleasondj
-Mar. 17, 2016 at 10:15am
Trick question. At least one of these is a transgender that’s doesn’t have a single gender identity. Shame on everyone for labeling these people as girls based only on their appearance.

 

[TenEightyOne]

New illusion from "The Dress" photographer.

Although that isn't "The Dress" photographer

 

[Robin]

Although that isn't "The Dress" photographer

Yeah, the dress photographer was just some random woman shopping!

I guess colour and vision scientists had a field day because of this. They basically were able to carry out the biggest public perception test in this field in history.

 

[FT-1]

It's that time of the year again where the internet can't agree on something. This time it is testing your aural senses - This audio clip either has someone saying "Yanny" or "Laurel", hit the link below to play it and draw your own conclusions


On my first listen, I heard "Yanny" but after paying attention to the lower pitch more, I can just about make out "Laurel". Guess I am superhuman!

 

[Sage Ages]

I can hear both of them just fine.

 

[TexRex]

 

[Robin]

All I hear is Laurel very clearly every time... is that right or wrong?

 

[TenEightyOne]

All I hear is Laurel very clearly every time... is that right or wrong?

Wrong, it means you can't hear higher frequency sounds.

Weirdly Mrs. Ten can hear "Yarry", and I played it to her blind (if that's the right word) before she even knew why I was asking her. Her hearing's a bit odd having spent her life as an orchestral low-string player.

 

[Robin]

Wrong, it means you can't hear higher frequency sounds

I must try it with headphones rather than crappy laptop speakers because I usually can hear high frequency sounds, for example I hear animal deterrent devices with supposedly inaudible sounds all the time.