Is there a correlation between which colours people see and certain character traits?

Why does black appear gold though?

See and tell me again how that's blue and black.

Because of the light. Our brain has the ability to differentiate colors based on lighting. Well, some peoples brains...

Look at a picture of the real dress, picture related.

>Because of the light.
What about the light? Let's say a take a photo of something black, and it shows up black in the photo. Now I want to change the lighting so it looks gold instead, what do I do?

Change the brightness in photoshop?

Change it how? Increase it? That would make the black grey no?

Are you actually that stupid or just fucking around?

Yeah I'm that stupid. These questions should be easy to answer though right?

...

Just a random picture of a black dress with brightness to the max... I can still see it as black with a lot of brightness, but some brainlets might see gold?

Your inability to see black shift to gold is a clear sigh of low intelligence. If you dont notice obvious transitions and fixate on the original color then you have blatant cognitive impairments.

This kind of makes it clearer to me alright.

I guess to my eyes when i look at the dress, my brain always thinks it's being lit with blue light. Which is possibly because on a sunny day, when i go inside everything looks bluish because my eyes were overexposed to warm yellowish sunlight from outside. Also daylight that's not from direct sunlight would be blue too.

Both interpretations are equally possible I guess.

A clear sign of low intelligence would be not being able to differentiate between an obviously over-brightened picture of a black dress.

Your inability to take in the entirety of the picture vs. the color of the dress itself would be a clear sign of low cognitive function.

color is complicated

color is complicated #2

youtu.be/1IqXyu14kpY?t=43m

this

even if you're viewing it on a horribly inaccurate screen you're plain fucking retarded if you unironically think it looks white and gold

Actually.. on second thought I'm not sure this makes sense.

What's happening in those yellow and blue squares? Are they normal alpha blending into what's below, of multiplying the colour values below? Because it looks like alpha blending, where multiplying would represent what real lighting would do.

Outside of the colored squares is the *true* colour presumably, which means it's evenly lit with white light. But inside the coloured squares is brighter in the dark areas than it is in the white light areas, which implies the dark spots on the dress should be darker in the coloured squares. Unless the colour layer is multiplying some channels by >1.0 which mean the skin colour would be brighter, but it's not..

This looks like normal alpha blending to me and not what would happen if you lit those dresses with those colours.

I guess something similar would happen with similar lighting, but not really in the way it's shown here..

To all the people claiming it's something to do with brain function or optical illusions - fuck off
The wavelengths of light recorded by the camera can be viewed here They are obviously NOT black and blue
If you somehow see it as actual black and blue as in the left photo here then you're the one suffering some kind of visual delusion

>what is lighting

It's not a question of whether the dress can appear different in different circumstances but rather that the specific photo in ops pic looks one way or another. You'd have to significantly change your monitor colors to get black and blue.

the dress is literally blue and black irl and in the picture. you just suck at interpreting the image

In that case, it's grayish blue and brown.

even disregarding the lighting, the dress, is bluer than the default "BLUE board" theme (yotsuba B) on Veeky Forums

even if you're completely clueless about the technical details, so that you think the """"gold"""" doesn't count as black, you're contradicting yourself by counting the blue as white, the blue parts definitely aren't strictly white

Maybe if there was more context in the image that would let you know the colors were unsaturated, but without much to compare, it's reasonable to say the dress in that particular picture looks gold and white. Anyone that says it's black and blue are doing so with prior knowledge or color filters on their screen. The picture itself is not an optical illusion. There is no subjectivity to the actual colors of the picture.

I dunno man that shining sky and everything being covered in light looks like context to me but I am apparently genius or something

I have always seen it as white/gold, 100% of the time.
Therefore, I must conclude that all black/blue posters are homosexuals, latent or otherwise.

youtube.com/watch?v=bobp5OHVsWY

I have seen both. Really I just have to look away for a few minutes and look at it again and sometimes I will see it in the white/gold combination. Try to mix it up. Look at it on your phone or tablet or something. It'll trigger eventually

i've only ever seen black and blue, even in the images meant to show you what 'gold and white' people see.

You miss the point. People who see blue and black are basing it on visual cues from the image itself. The fact that the background of the picture is extremely saturated with light is a visual cue that the dress itself is also saturated with light. Black when saturated with light can appear more of a gold hue - but it's still black. So when people say they see blue and black they aren't saying the EXACT RGB/hex color of the dress in the picture is black (because we aren't all autistic), but we're saying that the DRESS is blue and black. Which it is.

Also, when this photo first came out there wasn't a comparison to the original, so people claiming prior knowledge are full of shit.

Thanks for making this post early in the thread. These dress threads typically go full retard for some 20 posts before someone presents this obvious argument.

Color it's a character trait.

We don't see the wavelength.

It's about looking at the whole picture and being smart enough to interpret the colors and factor in the lighting. You can't compare only two pixels. The actual dress is blue and black, if you cannot tell from the picture it means you are special ed.

>The wavelengths of light recorded by the camera can be viewed here
dumbass, those aren't spectral colors

are cameras a spectrum?

strawpoll.me/13041163

I've been looking at this picture since the first day it came out and I still for the life of me can not see the dress as anything other than black and blue. How can i see it as gold and white for once?

people who see blue and black are in on the meme, people who see white and gold are normies

...

Idk man I see it mostly as blueish grey and brownish gold. I'm slightly color blind so idgaf but it seems clear that nobody can tell for certain from the picture. it looks like it's in the shade. It's just amazing people act like they've never seen an optical illusion.

Quite the mind fuck,
similar to that optical illusion with grey colors

Assume it's in deep shadow because the rest of the image is overexposed.
Your eyes will tell you it's blue and black still but you could think it's white and gold because they would look blue and black in the dark.

the light is obviously shining on the dress, it's not in the shade, you can see the shadows and uneven brightness ffs

Let be honest, the meme about the dress sucked a lot, but this pic shows how we DO NOT perceive reality, it is reconstructed by our brains.
Nice gif btw.

You're crazy if you see anything other than blue and vomit brown/gold.

fabrics irl aren't pitch black, they're not a black hole, if you shine a bright light on them they look brownish, and cameras and displays have a very limited dynamic range, you only have 8 bits (values 0-255) per red/green/blue channel, you have to adapt the exposure and such, the human eye adapts to different lighting conditions as well

Do you guys realise that since this is an actual dress that exists in reality and since this phenomenon went viral it's easy to find other pictures with better lighting because you're not the first ones to be curious about this so you can easily empirically verify that the dress is black and blue?

It took me ages to realise that when people were saying "white and gold", they didn't mean the pale blue/light brown combination I was seeing, but ACTUALLY white and gold. I kept lumping myself in with a bunch of weirdos.

Roughly equal to the correlation of which people are viewing the image in well lit rooms during the day, and which are viewing it in their mother's dark basement.

Man this meme has had a long run.

>people still trying to defend thinking the dress white and gold with ridiculous non-arguments
the dress is literally blue and black, kill yourselves

>People trying to claim you're more intelligent/rational if you see one thing or another
This board needs nuking

Sorry guys, but I literally can't see it in black and blue

Same here it will always gold and white...
Since I am 100% straight, this must mean that others are gay.

Come back to the thread in about 6 hours, that'll change, assuming you have a window in the room.

you can see in OP's image that it's the left scenario

this is what white and gold brainlets look like:

youtube.com/watch?v=rGpmhLUjs6Y

The dress looks like it's flickering between blue/black and white/gold. What does that mean for me?

You need a new monitor/phone

Wrong. That implies moving the dress to a darker area will make it look gold aND white. This clearly won't happen.

This is a matter of color constancy machinery relative to inference about scene composition. I see white and gold. An averaged sample of the pixel values in a given region, is irrelevant. It does not map to any underlying absolute truth, or perceptual reality.

Example. From a dark room, take a picture of a bright window. You will get a blue, sometimes blue-purple/pink ringing around it. It is very difficult to manually recreate in any given medium, because if you sample those pixels, it's actually borderline white. There is no deep sky/turquoise/neon blue. The perception of that color doesn't exist beyond certain contexts. You can't just take it and put it anywhere.

now set the white balance manually retard

No.

Final form right here
>think this shit is fake
>do the exact same thing on paint
>it's real
FUCK
HOW DO I SEE THIS PIECE OF TRASH AS BLACK BLUE

the whole dress bullshit is because some people just cant see shades as well

the only people who saw gold and whatever are people who dont understand how lighting affects color

There is a correlation between whichever colours you see and homosexuality

I bet you 10 bucks it's some sort of psyop to see how well 2+2=5 brainwashing works. The image at face value is clearly light blue-ish and gold, which most people will perceive as white and gold. But like a week later they started rolling out headlines that it's actually black and blue. There might be some weird photographic phenomenon involved, but not something intuitive for sure.

You will literally never see color distortion like this with the naked eye.

facepalm

Interesting world you live in, user. It's literally just bad lighting and some basic colour theory.

Fun fact for the brainlets out there: this picture was actually taken with a camera.

dude wow like i wouldjnt ever have

Just wanted to chime in. Part of my speech therapy involves reading a bunch of random shit out loud (don't worry, just to myself) to practice the sounds. I think some weird form of suppression takes place when you read something in your head and process it internally versus saying it out loud because reading any of these posts out loud really showcases just how bizarre and insane the dynamic in this thread is (and Veeky Forums posts are in general)

I have visual snow and see gold and white.

I've seen this as both. Initially I saw blue and black. But, one time I opened my downloads folder and saw this image when I wasn't expecting to see it and I saw white and gold. But only for less than a second. I went back to seeing black and gold, it blew my mind. Anyone else ever see both?

I understand how lighting affects color. What I don't understand is how people see different colors based on correcting the lighting somehow in their head instead of seeing what the photo actually is.

Because the brain is not a camera, but an amalgamated information processor. It builds an image and tries to put it into context based, not only on what is in the image and the environment in which it is viewing the image, but also upon its own memories of experience.

Thus, the color the dress appears to the individual to tends to vary with the lighting in the room the viewer's computer or phone was when they first saw it.

The mind is thus a subjective thing - though even if you sample the colors through a machine, you'll see, by simple color science, though black and blue, they also fall fairly far into gold and white hues.

The question being asked isn't what the actual color of the dress is though. The question is what is the colors in the photo. There is a meaningful difference because in the first case, you use the context mentioned to deduce what is happening. In the latter, you look at what is displayed at face value.

Well, yes, it only works because the lighting in the photo makes it a bit ambiguous, even when sampled and color metered. Even if it wasn't, however, you get into situations like that all the time, such as yonder: The angle and intensity of light affects which wavelengths are going to come back, so even objectively speaking, the fabric is emitting different colors under different exposures depending on frame of reference and environment, even if the chemical composition of the dress remains the same. In a sense, red roses really are white in red light.

The question isn't what is the actual color of the dress. The question isn't what is the colors in the photo. The question is what colors do you SEE.

People are not looking at the picture, seeing this , and then consciously deducing them to be either white/gold or blue/black. Their brains are unconsciously filtering the image for them, and they are only perceiving the adjusted colorings.

the polls were spammed by butthurt white and gold retards

>The question being asked isn't what the actual color of the dress is though. The question is what is the colors in the photo.
Is it? I'm pretty sure it wasn't.

That's what I've been asking, because some people are claiming this Looks black and blue to them on their screen/phone/etc...

I suspect people saYing this are memeing. But I'm open to explanations.

I think that's just similar confusion about the question being asked. Really, sampling the colours from the photo was a misunderstanding to begin with.

White/gold on my computer screen, blue/black on my Galaxy S8+

Probably has to do with the horrid color accuracy on all consumer electronics level computer displays.

the color on the right is clearly blue, not white. if you think that is white then it's just as valid to say that the color on the left is black

It is scientifically proven that people who see black and blue are below average IQ by several points while those who seen gold and white are average or above average

weak bait

I always see it as black and blue at night, and white and gold during the day.

But I have a big ass 7x7 foot window by my computer.

I can see it either way, if I shift my vision some - bit disconcerting for some reason.

That's weird, is there some sort of reason that people of lower IQ have a better insight into the way things really are?