What colors are the dress?
The_Nameless_Bard wrote:
I wouldn't call "a stupid debate that could easily have been avoided by using google" a phenomenon. Science never even needed to be involved.
Are you being willfully ignorant here or just pain silly?
This is by the very definition of the word a phenomenon.
And when a phenomenon occurs it's kind of commonplace to use science to explain it.
Checking on google not only takes a lot more time than interpreting it as is, but it also defeats the purpose of the exercise. People are asked to let their brains interpret the colors, not to look it up on google...
"Doing something, almost being done, then parents come in and don't let you finish.
Yes, I had a rough childhood." - devdevil
Yes, I had a rough childhood." - devdevil
Oh, wow. xkcd delivers once again!
This perfectly illustrates the phenomenon.
I just checked in an editing program to make sure and the colors of the dresses in both the blue and orange light are EXACTLY the same.
These are their RGB values:
White/Blue: 135, 154, 189
Gold/Black: 113, 94, 58
I was honestly kind of surprised at how huge the difference in color actually is, and it's all in our brain.
Janitsu wrote:
My biology teacher (a huge redditor/imgurian herself) explained it to us:
The cone and rod cells in our eyes need different amount of light (different frequency as well) to actually get irritated. If you look it in a shadowy place and with not too much light it is white/gold. In a lighted place, it is blue/black (the real colour).
You can test it with a light. Turn off all the lights and look at it. Then point the light into your eyes and look at it slowly turn from white to blue.
The cone and rod cells in our eyes need different amount of light (different frequency as well) to actually get irritated. If you look it in a shadowy place and with not too much light it is white/gold. In a lighted place, it is blue/black (the real colour).
You can test it with a light. Turn off all the lights and look at it. Then point the light into your eyes and look at it slowly turn from white to blue.
I'm afraid that your teacher is likely wrong on this one. Those things may have an effect, but I doubt it is due to the cones and rods. Read my explanation, then look at the xkcd comic. It perfectly illustrates the phenomena of how our brains interpret color.
"We've had a few gloomy years with bad console ports, and what do we get in the light at the end of the console-tunnel? A tablet OS ported to PC." - Atlas Tasume, on Windows 8
You're missing my point and that's fine. The fact that a debate started when people could easily have found the answer themselves is stupid. It was pretty simple to determine what colors the dress definitely wasn't and that's my only problem with this.
Thank you for not outright calling me stupid though. Phenomenon has multiple definitions and while this is "a fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable" it is not "something that is impressive or extraordinary". :P We were using the word to mean different things.
The science is interesting, but it's also nothing new.
This image (and many other optical illusions) abuses the way we see things as well:
As an aside, I've stared at the dress image long enough that it just looks blue and black now. gg.
Thank you for not outright calling me stupid though. Phenomenon has multiple definitions and while this is "a fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable" it is not "something that is impressive or extraordinary". :P We were using the word to mean different things.
The science is interesting, but it's also nothing new.
This image (and many other optical illusions) abuses the way we see things as well:
As an aside, I've stared at the dress image long enough that it just looks blue and black now. gg.
The_Nameless_Bard wrote:
The fact that a debate started when people could easily have found the answer themselves is stupid.
Well the debate over which color it actually is, yes, but that's not what is being discussed here. I've already stated that this is about the science; not about which color you think it is, but rather why you think it is that color.
Quoted:
Phenomenon has multiple definitions and while this is "a fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable" it is not "something that is impressive or extraordinary".
Why not just use Google for that, like you've advocated for other things? :P
"a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question."
Quoted:
The science is interesting, but it's also nothing new.
And that's all there is to it.
Being interesting alone is enough to warrant both discussion and attention.
"Gold can't buy you rape." - Mr Sark
Mooninites wrote:
There's a lot of thigns I really don't give a **** about, but this may top the list. As incredible as it may sound, I have a lot better things to do with my life than worry about what color a dress is
Good for you, honey.
"Blizzard spoke thus; Thou shalt not BM. And the players replied Nay, I shall Play my hand with Lethal already on the board. And so Blizzard sent unto them this Brawl of Yogg, As a lesson for their sins of Pride and Greed, for he is the Prophet of Madness and RNG. On that day, the tavern descended into an era of chaos and darkness, until the weekend passed and everyone forgot all about it. Amen. Book of SMOrc, Verse 20, Chapter 4." - Feam T
Searz wrote:
Why not just use Google for that, like you've advocated for other things? :P
"a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question."
"a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question."
The_Nameless_Bard wrote:
Why only quote half of that particular statement? I mean, it's nice that you wanna make me look stupid, but intentionally taking that out of context when you knew what I was getting at is a poor argument for such.
I don't understand. How does that make you look stupid?
Such was clearly not my intention nor the result, at least by my interpretation.
I'm a strong independent black mage who don't need no mana.
The_Nameless_Bard wrote:
Why only quote half of that particular statement? I mean, it's nice that you wanna make me look stupid, but intentionally taking that out of context when you knew what I was getting at is a poor argument for such.
That's how he argues pretty much every time.
Taking stuff out of context, ignoring stuff that might prove him wrong and only answer to stuff he has some seemingly reasonable retort.
It's like people using this smiley :) when trying to act all high and mighty on the internet.
B2T.
It was always White/Gold for me, I never saw any blue or black unless it was an edited photo.
What Janitsu's teacher said sounds really believeable and at least lets me accept it instead of using PS or anything similar to read out RGB codes.
Also, her statement is pretty much the same explaination using biology :/
You need to log in before commenting.
<Member>