PDA

View Full Version : Wayyyyyy OT - the dress color debate



Weston Bye
03-01-2015, 03:52 PM
I only post this here because I know (most) of you here to be rational thinkers.

I'm sure that you have heard about the controversy about the colors of a dress posted on the Internet. I will not trouble the BBS by linking to the image - you can find it yourself with your favorite search engine.

I bring this up because I saw the colors as gold and white rather than blue and black. I even printed the image and saw the same thing. My wife saw blue and black and my daughter saw gold and white. Somebody is crazy?

I was able to see the image in blue and black if I viewed with my peripheral vision, but not straight on.

Later on, after working for some time on a document at the computer, I got up to do something else and as I passed by, happened to glance at the printout. What!!! Sudden Stop. I turned, and looked straight-on and the image of the dress was blue and black! Who is crazy now?

Now - still later - the image is back to gold and white.

Curiouser and curiouser.....

Carm
03-01-2015, 03:57 PM
Grau, theure freund,ist alles theorie, und groen das lebens goldner baum.

In English. Go take a walk in the snow. Feel your heartbeat while the snot freezes.

PStechPaul
03-01-2015, 04:44 PM
I had a physics book that described how the human eye discerns colors, and had a picture of the American flag with green and black stripes, and black stars on a yellow background. If you stared at it for a while, and then looked away or closed your eyes, you would see it in the correct colors. The eye becomes conditioned to a color and loses sensitivity, so that when the stimulus is removed, it sees the opposite color. Thus the red/green and blue/yellow inversion. The black/white involves all of the receptors.

Fasttrack
03-01-2015, 04:47 PM
Never forget that the reality you experience is filtered heavily by your brain! I had a similar experience to Weston Bye - colors flop between white and gold and blue and dark brown/black depending on how much of the photo I'm seeing, etc.

In reality, the dress is blue and black:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dress-a-black-and-blue-debate-over-the-color-of-a-dress-stirs-social-media-1425063162

J Tiers
03-01-2015, 06:14 PM
Some of it is likely to be the eye/brain, mixed with what color you THINK the lighting in the picture is.

The rest of it is a bit fake, due to the brightness of the image. If you take the image, and adjust the brightness, it will go through pretty much all the color combos that people report.

A very lightened image will tend to show such a light blue that it is assumed by the eye/brain to be white that is affected by outside lighting.

DATo
03-01-2015, 06:46 PM
This is a pretty good explanation ... with a surprising conclusion (for me anyway).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ietlE9JtC4M

Errol Groff
03-01-2015, 07:14 PM
This is the sort of **** that happens when there are no (American) football games to watch on the telly.

boslab
03-01-2015, 07:51 PM
Roughly how long have you been taking LSD, it seems some is getting in my tea too, or it may be the mushrooms I picked
Mark

Daveb
03-01-2015, 07:56 PM
The time to worry is when you don't know you're confused but if you don't know you're confused, you don't know there's anything to worry about. Is there some sort of problem here?

dp
03-01-2015, 08:07 PM
There's a bunch of photos of the dress out there but the one that is making everyone crazy is this one.

http://swiked.tumblr.com/post/112073818575/guys-please-help-me-is-this-dress-white-and

The colors reproduced by the camera are so bad there's no way to know what color the dress is. I would have to remove it from the wearer and analyze it with a spectral tool.

Paul Alciatore
03-01-2015, 08:54 PM
How we humans see and perceive color is a complicated subject. Although there are instruments that can measure a given color down to many decimal places, the human eye is not one of them. There are many factors that can influence the color that a person "sees". They include the lighting, the visual environment, the recent history of their viewing, and how their brain interprets what the eye is sending to it. Since this is over the internet, add to that the computer used and how it processes color AND the monitor on that computer and how it is set up. And these are just the ones that come immediately to mind.

As a TV engineer I had to set-up and match color cameras for my whole career. If there were three or more cameras on a "shoot" then they had to show "true" colors and, even more importantly, MATCH each other as closely as possible. This was not an easy job with earlier cameras that used tube type pickups (vidicon and plumbican tubes). My first consideration was the room and it's lighting. Then I needed a high quality picture monitor that was properly set up FOR MY EYES. Then, and only then, could I proceed to try to properly set the colors on the cameras and to match them to each other.

The room lighting is important because different types of lighting have different color temperatures (basic colors). White is not just one color. White is how a white surface looks under the existing lighting. The type of ambient light has a large effect on this. Of course, you can have different "white" surfaces and some are better than others. Some cost a lot of money for just a white card. The kicker in this is that the human eye, or at least the brain behind it, will try to see objects of a known color in their proper colors. So, skin will look like skin, even if the light is colored with another color. You adapt your visual processes to make what you "know" to be true, true.

Other factors in the visual environment can have an effect. If there are a lot of red objects in your field of view, they will tend to make a white object look more blue-green. Likewise for other colors. Basically this means that your eye/brain combination may not adapt perfectly to the surrounding lighting conditions.

If you recently looked at a colored image or scene, then your eyes have probably adapted to that colored vision. It will take time for them to change. In that time interval, you can see some strange colors. This is a combination of a short term and a longer term effect so it can be confusing.

Many modern computers attempt to "correct" the colors you see on the screen. If you look at your display driver, you may see these features. They may not be properly set up and may distort some or all colors.

Finally, each display device (screen) will have it's own unique set of differences in how it displays colors. In my TV days, I found that even the professional display monitors that cost tens of thousands of dollars could show differences between two identical models that only differed by one digit in their serial numbers, could show differences in their side by side display of the same picture after the most careful set up possible. Believe me, I spent hours trying to match a pair and there was always some scene that showed a small difference. Thus, mass produced displays that only cost a few hundred dollars will also show differences, some large and some small. But there will be differences.

I do not find it the least bit surprising that these dresses, which probably also play tricks with the light, appear to be different colors to different people. No surprise at all. In fact, I would be surprised by the opposite.

J Tiers
03-01-2015, 09:09 PM
That's the same picture, but a totally different brightness. That one is obviously the color the designer says it is (black and blue).

There are other pictures floating around which pick up the shiny highlights on the lace, which seem to be reflected yellow-gold, and THOSE pictures are "designed" to show up very light blue (or maybe white with a reflection) and gold, apparently by lightening up the colors, or possibly correcting the picture by selecting the blue and saying it should be white.

I just took the linked one, and adjusted the brightness and contrast etc, until it would look nearly any way I want.

Basically, there are so many versions floating around that your chances of seeing the same one as another person are probably nil by now.

dp
03-01-2015, 09:21 PM
My understanding is the picture I linked is the original and only significant image in the debate. Other images will look different. It is useful to know that the linked image looks nothing like the actual dress. It can't be known why but it may be a simple as a low battery in the camera.

Here's a photo series I took at a party in South Dakota during Sturgis week. The last few pictures faded because the camera battery was going dead. The last photo isn't shown because it wasn 't recorded.

http://thevirtualbarandgrill.com/gallery2/v/personal01/dp_gallery/rtts2000/?g2_page=5

That was a hell of a fun ride, too, cuz we took the long way from Seattle to Sturgis. It starts here:
http://thevirtualbarandgrill.com/gallery2/v/personal01/dp_gallery/rtts2000/

Hard to believe that was 15 years ago - I still have the bike.

Juiceclone
03-01-2015, 09:38 PM
Bleahhhhh
save the image to your computer and then view it with a credible photo manipulation software like PaintShopPro etc. Adjust the brightness up and down. normal will be blue and black. When you get to the max bright it will appear gold and white....If your printer printed that...it's not working correctly

CalM
03-01-2015, 10:15 PM
Reality is only a persistent illusion.

White is what the brain expects, as are the other colors.

You can change your reality just by "talking" to yourself.

Words are THAT powerful.

Try for yourself, don't take my mention of it as anything but more illusion.

flylo
03-01-2015, 10:35 PM
I must not be one of those "rational thinkers" as I didn't have a clue Weston even wore dresses, oh well:p

dp
03-02-2015, 01:41 AM
Bleahhhhh
save the image to your computer and then view it with a credible photo manipulation software like PaintShopPro etc. Adjust the brightness up and down. normal will be blue and black. When you get to the max bright it will appear gold and white....If your printer printed that...it's not working correctly

You do realize the kerfuffle is about the image as published and not as modified, right? It would not matter what color a modified version of the photo is. The real story is that any two people see different colors in the image as published and there's no consensus what the perceived colors are because there are so many perceived colors. Nobody's even bothered to discuss the actual colors based on analysis nor, apparently, do they care because the conversation is about perceived colors, only. Technology is probably not helping because so many displays show color tones and relative contrast and saturation differently. Add to that that nobody has a perfect display and personal color perception to speak as an authority on actual colors.

Then there is the camera that captured the image that can be a contributor, and another great unknown is the color of the lighting when the picture was taken, or if a white LED "flash" was used, etc.

There is no right answer regarding the dress color except this sentence you are now reading.

MrSleepy
03-02-2015, 05:29 AM
When I see the photo .. it looks white and gold to me.

but when I saw the exact same dress on a tv show , i saw blue and black.

maxi87
03-02-2015, 06:03 AM
This is pretty crazy if you actually think about it! Funny to think that we are all seeing different colours all of the time!

Weston Bye
03-02-2015, 07:23 AM
.... I bring this up because I saw the colors as gold and white rather than blue and black. I even printed the image and saw the same thing. My wife saw blue and black and my daughter saw gold and white. Somebody is crazy?

I was able to see the image in blue and black if I viewed with my peripheral vision, but not straight on.
Later on, after working for some time on a document at the computer, I got up to do something else and as I passed by, happened to glance at the printout. What!!! Sudden Stop. I turned, and looked straight-on and the image of the dress was blue and black! Who is crazy now?

Now - still later - the image is back to gold and white......

I quote portions of my original post to remind all of us that I saw the same printed image in both states. Perhaps it took some eye fatigue to shift me over to blue/black, but my normal view is white/gold.

I believe that my printer printed white/gold. I used some blue & black sharpies to color in a portion of the dress. I could tell the difference - but my wife couldn't. Go figure.

J Tiers
03-02-2015, 07:58 AM
I quote portions of my original post to remind all of us that I saw the same printed image in both states. Perhaps it took some eye fatigue to shift me over to blue/black, but my normal view is white/gold.

I believe that my printer printed white/gold. I used some blue & black sharpies to color in a portion of the dress. I could tell the difference - but my wife couldn't. Go figure.

Well, we cannot possibly judge anything, because you won't show us the image that causes you this quandary.

As I mentioned, there are so many versions of it, sometimes 2 or 3 on one site, at different brightnesses, that it is impossible to guess what you might or might not have seen.

The FACTS seem to be that there are highlights of gold on the black, AND there are lighter spots on the blue. So ALL the colors described are at least in part present.

The debate is over how the jpeg processor handles them, and THEN ONLY what the eye does with the output of the jpeg processing and the video card, with the display over-riding that.

Weston Bye
03-02-2015, 08:09 AM
OK. So here is a link to one of many articles on the subject - as good as any. shows the actual blue/black dress and then the photo in question.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dress-a-black-and-blue-debate-over-the-color-of-a-dress-stirs-social-media-1425063162

How about a poll: Who sees what, just from the second photo in the article. No printing, no manipulating, just what shows up on the monitor.

vpt
03-02-2015, 08:14 AM
I see lavender and gold.

PStechPaul
03-02-2015, 04:26 PM
I see dead people... :rolleyes:

The dress on the left (of the same basic style) appears to be black and silvery white. The one in the middle seems to be black and blue, but the top black portion has a somewhat gold tint. There appear to be a couple of green lights in the ceiling, which could affect the apparent color. In the washed out image below, the black portions appear to be a sort of tan (which could be termed gold or yellow), and the blue portions appear to be a light blue. It looks like the image was overexposed and washed out.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/RV-AP733_DRESS_M_20150227173151.jpg

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/RV-AP734_DRESS2_JV_20150227173256.jpg
It's amazing how colors appear in moonlight. I went camping once and I had a light green tarp, which blended into the ground, while my friend's was bright fluorescent orange, and it really stood out in the sunlight. At night, however, in moonlight, My light green tarp appeared almost white, while my friend's looked black. Moonlight has little red component, and mostly blue, so his tarp absorbed the light while mine reflected it.

dp
03-02-2015, 06:22 PM
The lower picture was taken at a different location than the upper image and is not even same dress. The piebald fabric to the left of the lower image is not seen in the other image and the tag is on opposite sides between the images. There is also a missing cape in the upper image. Apples and oysters.

However - we already know from this thread that in the HSM audience not everyone perceives the same hues.

Bob Fisher
03-02-2015, 07:47 PM
Don't mind them , Wes, all us smart guys saw gold and white! Bob.

J Tiers
03-02-2015, 08:05 PM
The lower picture was taken at a different location than the upper image and is not even same dress. The piebald fabric to the left of the lower image is not seen in the other image and the tag is on opposite sides between the images. There is also a missing cape in the upper image. Apples and oysters.



YOU say "apples and oysters".

The FACTS say that BOTH THOSE images are out and about feeding this somewhat manufactured controversy.

Frankly, if ANYONE can look at the shop window version and say "white and gold", then it is obvious they should have their driving license permanently revoked for blindness.

This is not a matter of different people seeing different things...... I'm calling BS on the whole deal. It's MANUFACTURED.

You can actually examine the pixels of any image and determine OBJECTIVELY what they show.... what they are composed of. There should not be any malarkey about "perception" and so forth.

THAT would be fine if you looked at the thing itself, but once there is an "image", it is tied down to color proportions and brightness, etc, etc. AND you are seeing those pixels, and not the object. All the information you get is from what those pixels contain.... what the originator of that image ALLOWED the image to contain.... But, in this case it is looking like there is not "an" image, but "many".

I am suspecting that the "original" photo, if there really is one, has been being changed over time to mess with folks minds.

Nothing to see there, folks, move right along and worry about some reality show star's love life..... That's far better for you than thinking would be.

Jim Hubbell
03-02-2015, 08:42 PM
I see white slightly bluish and gold. My grand daughter beside me looking at the same image sees black and blue.

That would seem to me to indicate we have different perceptions of the same object.


Jim

dp
03-02-2015, 08:59 PM
The scope of the debate has never been about the photo with the three dresses and it is only a distraction. The debate has also never been about what machines might conclude about the colors. It is and has always been about how different people perceive the solo dress image and that so many people disagree about what each is sure of. It boils down to that "sure of" part. Anyone who looks at the original untouched image will have a unique perception of it and the amazement is the degree of variation reported.

Here's another example. http://www.andrewkelsall.com/color-effect-designers-should-see/

J Tiers
03-02-2015, 11:26 PM
A "distraction" perhaps....

I have seen an article in which the photo is reproduced 3 times. The SAME photo... and the one you show second in your post. The three have different degrees of brightness.

And, sure enough, one is very light, picking up the green/gold highlights as the color, and making the blue appear to be white lit by blue. Another darker one is intermediate, and the final darkest one is essentially the colors of the shop window picture.

The original posted picture, I have seen reproduced as any of the three, which leads me to think that it may have been swapped at least a few times simply to make a controversy.

I took the picture you posted, and with very crude tools, which operated on the entire picture (a person with access to even photoshop would not do this crude a job), I show two version differing only by a brute simple variation of brightness.

Obviously if a stone hammer simple program can show that, then a decent one which can work on parts of a picture, would be capable of making differing pictures which appear to show radically different color schemes, to the consternation of the public.

The controversy seems to be "manufactured".

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0803/jstanley/RV2_zpsilfy3nvp.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/jstanley/media/RV2_zpsilfy3nvp.jpg.html)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0803/jstanley/RV1_zpsouk5wi2j.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/jstanley/media/RV1_zpsouk5wi2j.jpg.html)

flylo
03-03-2015, 12:06 AM
Gold & white. Cabin fever must be at full tilt. I wonder if the dress forums are checking colors of machine tools:p

dp
03-03-2015, 12:16 AM
Definitely we're a fashion-hip group. I feel empowered now to ask - does my lathe make my a$$ look big? I have my mother's thighs, you know.

wierdscience
03-03-2015, 12:32 AM
Given the publicity it has garnered the true color of the dress is now Green $$$$:D

morehelium
03-03-2015, 03:25 AM
I see a stain on the dress.
Does that make me a Demomcrat or Republican?

Black_Moons
03-03-2015, 03:38 AM
Opened up paintshop, Used color eyedropper tool.
The dress is gold (brown) and light blue. You all failed.
http://i.imgur.com/oOq7gTW.png

The selected brown was R119, G101, B63 btw.

PStechPaul
03-03-2015, 04:51 AM
Read my post #24. I said the second image looked like tan or gold, and light blue.

"Say nyet to the dress"!

Now, try to determine the material it's made of. If an attractive model were wearing it, I think it could be felt. :rolleyes:

And it is certainly made up out of whole cloth (http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/make+up+out+of+whole+cloth)...

vpt
03-03-2015, 08:24 AM
That "light blue" is lavender... lol

dp
03-03-2015, 01:00 PM
Opened up paintshop, Used color eyedropper tool.
The dress is gold (brown) and light blue. You all failed.

The selected brown was R119, G101, B63 btw.

The color data depends entirely on which pixel you selected to sample, or the average of the group of pixels sampled. Not everyone will agree with your perception of gold (brown) and light blue. That is the source of the controversy.

Conversationally, color cannot be described except by comparing a color to another similar color and even that is subjective. Try, for example, to describe red to a person except don't use the word "red". Just say something like "I am holding a card that is a solid color..." and without saying it is similar to the color of blood, etc. Don't use any examples and you find it is impossible. Add to that we don't know what brown looks like to you. My son is color-blind so I've had to go through this a lot. It does no good to show him and identify a sock as green because it looks no different to him than an orange sock. He can perceive color saturation so that similar colors look more or less brilliant but he cannot put them in color order.

bruto
03-03-2015, 06:27 PM
Two things matter here. First of all, color perception is relative, which is why we can adjust our color perception when we come in out of the sun and turn on the incandescent light, a difference a camera finds radical.

The second is bad exposure. You can see in the background of the famous picture that the exposure and white balance are way off. As an example, I took a macro photograph of a couple of video cassettes on a shelf. A black cover is next to a dark blue one. I took two pictures, one more or less correct, and the other with exposure and white balance off. And guess what? The dark blue is nearly white, and the black is gold. Rocket science!https://app.box.com/s/8t1fl6y8a25dfsw2lpk1t0dtqr3xqubh

https://app.box.com/s/8t1fl6y8a25dfsw2lpk1t0dtqr3xqubh

J Tiers
03-03-2015, 06:30 PM
Two things matter here. First of all, color perception is relative, which is why we can adjust our color perception when we come in out of the sun and turn on the incandescent light, a difference a camera finds radical.

The second is bad exposure. You can see in the background of the famous picture that the exposure and white balance are way off. As an example, I took a macro photograph of a couple of video cassettes on a shelf. A black cover is next to a dark blue one. I took two pictures, one more or less correct, and the other with exposure and white balance off. And guess what? The dark blue is nearly white, and the black is gold. Rocket science!



Ain't digital imaging great? You can get anything you want..... As the originators of the controversy seem to know very well.

PStechPaul
03-03-2015, 07:27 PM
This was sure a cheap way to get lots of free advertising. Some doofus snapped a shot with a cell phone, while they might have paid a profesional photographer a thousand dollars to set up lights and carefully adjust exposure to get the color perfect, and nobody would have given it a second glance or passed it on as a viral image. Maybe they planned that all along. :rolleyes:

Jim Hubbell
03-03-2015, 09:10 PM
As I read thru this It seems to me that the main point is not that it has or has not been photo shopped. It is that two people looking at the same image, however it is graded, see rather different colors. It makes no difference how "good or bad " the quality of the picture may be. I have not seen what I consider a full explanation of this perception.




Next day: Got 99 on hue test! 84 yr. old eyes messing with me.

Mike Nash
03-03-2015, 09:27 PM
As I read thru this It seems to me that the main point is not that it has or has not been photo shopped. It is that two people looking at the same image, however it is graded, see rather different colors. It makes no difference how "good or bad " the quality of the picture may be. I have not seen what I consider a full explanation of this perception.

Sounds just like politics to me...

bruto
03-03-2015, 09:56 PM
As I read thru this It seems to me that the main point is not that it has or has not been photo shopped. It is that two people looking at the same image, however it is graded, see rather different colors. It makes no difference how "good or bad " the quality of the picture may be. I have not seen what I consider a full explanation of this perception.

I have seen some different renditions of the same picture, and not all act the same. Similar effects can be gotten in different ways. In at least one of the versions I've seen, if you look at it on an LCD monitor and tilt the monitor off axis, which darkens it, the correct colors appear. In other versions they do not. So some of the variation may depend on what version of the picture you see, as well as what equipment you see it on, what color temperature you're seeing it in, and what other colors are in your field of view. It may also depend on what method is used by whatever digital apparatus is at hand to produce the appearance of color. Perhaps someone here can answer, but I suspect that additive and subtractive processes, while both can produce a given color, do not react the same to error.

I have seen all sorts of discussions on how colors are perceived, including some rather interesting speculation on whether we can perceive colors we have not been told about. It seems that the color blue is particularly hard to pin down. In some places where no distinction is made between blue and green, people who are tested cannot pick an obviously blue square out from a mass of obviously green ones. Color is very mysterious.

dp
03-03-2015, 10:26 PM
Here is an objective color perception test that no two people where will get the same.

http://www.xrite.com/online-color-test-challenge

Here is a test for color perception deficiency.

http://colorvisiontesting.com/ishihara.htm

Some people don't perceive the same way colors seen with each eye.

PStechPaul
03-03-2015, 11:40 PM
I got a score of 23 out of 100, which is pretty good. Here is how I ordered the colors, and I can see where I may have made mistakes:

http://enginuitysystems.com/pix/Color_Test.jpg

http://enginuitysystems.com/pix/Color_Test_Score.jpg

http://enginuitysystems.com/pix/Color_Test_Score_Rank.jpg

bruto
03-04-2015, 12:13 AM
I got a 27 which is not too bad, and like the example above, it was worst in the middle where blue and green are confused.

Definitely some difference between one eye and the other.

I did it again, with a little more care, and with tilting the screen of my laptop, and got 11. Still the most error in the green-blue and the far left tans, but not too bad at age 67. If you have a flat screen it helps to tilt it a little to double check.

dp
03-04-2015, 04:05 AM
I did a little better. I think the test validates the quirkiness of identifying colors pretty well. The test with the embedded numbers is similar to the one I gave my son when he was around age 9. His uncle and grandfather on his mother's side were both color vision impaired and I knew it was genetically probable he would be, too. He is.

http://metalworkingathome.com/images/ColorScore.png

vpt
03-04-2015, 08:05 AM
I got a 24 but I did just get up not long ago and haven't had all my coffee yet.

A.K. Boomer
03-04-2015, 08:50 AM
At least you guys get technical with it and that's something - but in general - me see dress thing as sad sign of times...

RussZHC
03-04-2015, 09:33 AM
I'm here for the test :p

colour perception, the 2 indicating difficulties...I wonder if there is a gradient for that as well, I see the 29 of the 29/70 plate, barely any of the 70
I see the 57 of the 57/35 plate about a third of the "3" and about half of the "5", I found with the 57/35, after the fact, I can tell myself to "not see" the 57 and focus looking for the 35.

working on the other test, doing it several different ways and want to give my eyes a rest since I feel that plays a role the same way if you look at a grid and then look away quickly you see where the intersections were/are as opposed to seeing the grid lines

Edit: going left to right top to bottom = 8, going left to right bottom to top = 7, going right to left bottom to top or top to bottom = 15 (top or bottom of four rows, left to right being which side I moved the first square, so left means I moved the furthest left square first, trying not to move in the opposite direction of travel at all), blues caused the most errors

Weston Bye
03-04-2015, 09:40 AM
Opened up paintshop, Used color eyedropper tool.
The dress is gold (brown) and light blue. You all failed.
http://i.imgur.com/oOq7gTW.png

The selected brown was R119, G101, B63 btw.

Fascinating - as the late Spock would say. The color rendition of the original object gets garbled in the first photo, recognized electronically as a different color as in BM's post, but the original color impression still survives when viewed by some people.

Brings the three polarizing light filters experiment to mind: Two polarizing filters at 90 let no light through, but a third in between the two at 45 allows some.

bruto
03-04-2015, 09:56 AM
On the subject of how different color systems can appear to produce the same color in different ways, here's a link that does a pretty good job of explaining the difference between RGB and CMY color, and why, I suspect, different presentations of what seems to be the same image can differ so greatly in our ability to see or recover colors:

http://www.photozone.de/imaging

dp
03-04-2015, 11:49 AM
At least you guys get technical with it and that's something - but in general - me see dress thing as sad sign of times...

Folks who try to make the discussion about the dress itself don't get it. It's about a poorly rendered photograph containing colors that look little like the actual dress (a fact which itself is not important to the discussion) and how amazed and stubborn people can be regarding how they perceive the colors in the picture. There is a well understood underlying cause for why the color perception issue exists, but even that is not part of the original discussion going on around the world. That discussion is more closely related to the "Someone is wrong on the internet" phenomenon and subsequent response to people who shared their color perception in the original photo. The people who wish to be seen as right on the internet don't understand that the science defends every opinion of what colors are perceived. That is a sad sign of the times.

loose nut
03-04-2015, 04:34 PM
Just give them see through dress's and nobody will care anymore.

Jon Heron
03-04-2015, 04:51 PM
Just give them see through dress's and nobody will care anymore.
Now your talking!
Providing there is a weight or roll count limit on who gets the see through style...
Been to a nude beach? Many should not be nude in daylight...
:rolleyes:
Cheers,
Jon

loose nut
03-05-2015, 09:59 AM
Now your talking!
Providing there is a weight or roll count limit on who gets the see through style...
Been to a nude beach? Many should not be nude in daylight...
:rolleyes:
Cheers,
Jon

.....+1

Daveb
03-19-2015, 08:06 PM
Been to a nude beach? Many should not be nude in daylight...
Jon[/QUOTE]

Yep! Aint all they're cracked up to be.
Dave

Lew Hartswick
03-20-2015, 09:14 AM
Many should not be nude in daylight...
:rolleyes:
Cheers,
Jon
All the tattooed ones should be wearing a Burka . :-)
...lew...