At first I honestly thought that this was some kind of well orchestrated hoax. Who could possibly see a change? Then the wife came home and told me that she indeed did have the colors change on her. OTOH my perception has not changed at all. Still four lights.
Yup. It is for everyone without fucked up eyes. #BlueandGold
Clearly, they’re the same color.
You’ve gotta wonder why “what color is the robot?” didn’t catch on with men and women across the globe.
I first saw it as obviously white and gold and what the fuck is wrong with you people?
And then it flipped.
Now I can only see blue and black.
So cool.
What I’m wondering is if the people who ONLY ever saw the dress as blue/black, and never saw the white/gold, can look at that side-by-side, and STILL see the left picture only as blue/black. If so, that would totally blow my mind, since the two are like night and day when next to each other.
I’ve been trying every suggestion on this thread, and have only ever seen white (with bluish tint) and gold in the original photo. In the side-by-side, the right photo is obviously blue/black.
Basically this.
The photo is so badly overexposed / have the white balance messed up that basically is as someone would have Photoshopped it.
The interesting part of this is the whole discussion on Internet, psychologically speaking. It’s a semantic trick, almost. You see, if the original question would have been
“This photo has been filtered/modified. What was the original color of the dress?”
The discussion would have been 10 times less… abundant. People argues because they just can’t believe other people are seeing other colors. But with my question it would have much less arguing because some may believe the filter has turned the color from A to B, and others will believe the original color was more or less A, but both sides would understand both possibilities are true. Because who knows how much have been modified from the original color? We don’t know if it has been a little or a lot, so we don’t know.
But at the end of the day a RGB value is a RGB value (light blue and brown/gold). What was the original RGB value before the color balance? Who the fuck knows.
/Team fuchsia.
The Wired article you linked in the op actually contradicts that :P
Yes. It’s a lighter or more faded blue, but still clearly blue. It just looks like an overexposed photo of the dress on the right.
I do see the gold, but I think my brain just sees that as the yellow lighting of the store interacting with the black fabric and so barely registers it. If I look closer I can tell that it’s showing gold in the picture, but at first look my eyes/brain tell me the fabric is black. So I can see the gold caused by the lighting, but at the same time I think I recognise it as the lighting and not the actual colour of the material.
That’s exactly what I do, yes.
I find that to be a weird way to look at things. I agree completely that the discussion would have been different if that had been the question. There are tons of possible questions which lead to different discussions.
What color is the dress? - Asks about the person’s perception
What color is the original dress? - objective fact but more or less impossible from just the photo
What color are the different part of the photo? - objective fact but not necessarily in line with either of the above two questions
To me the dress triggers the “optical illusion - that’s a neat effect” mental state. Explaining it via photo manipulation is fine. But as soon as you say its a manipulated or filtered image it looses all interest. On the other hand I find it really interesting that someone would would equate a poor photograph with Photoshop as if the original artifact was less important than the “fixed” version.
I don’t care what the dress color actually is. From this I conclude that, objectively, the image is clearly light blue and gold, and my eyes are working, and blue-blackers can SUCK IT.
Didn’t this whole debate come about because of the dress appearing as a different color in person at a wedding the woman attended? Or at least that’s what I got from an article I read, and that’s how the dress became viral is because she then took a picture of it and uploaded it somewhere to get different opinions on it. So people saying it’s definitely this color or that color because of the exposure of the photo are incorrect then.
Either way I see white and gold. Maybe a bluish tint if I make myself think it’s blue but it’s still more whitish to me.
No, the mother of the bride sent a photo of the dress she was going to wear at the wedding to the bride and groom. The bride and groom disagreed on the colour (blue/black vs white/gold) and then it got posted on facebook where their family and friends also disagreed. On the day of the wedding the mother wore the dress and it turned out to be blue/black.
The photo was then shared on tumblr.
See here: #TheDress - What's behind the white or blue debate? - BBC News
I see blue-tinged white and gold. Does that mean I have cancer or something?
No, that’s only if your hand is bigger than your face.
It IS blue-tinged white and gold (in the photo), so congratulations, you’re part of the Sees What is Actually There master race.
Gold? I’m not saying there isn’t a washed out gold tinge to the black, because there is, but that’s because it’s black that’s obviously been washed out. You white and gold people are starting to prove that we can’t trust democracy.
The thing about black is this-- once it becomes any color at all, it’s not black anymore.
It means you are human, and have not yet been body-snatched.