Friday Challenge: Windowpane or Glen PlaidFeb 27th, 2015

[Mr. Claymore]



So, I've been planning on getting a new windowpane SC made. Would you guys go for an off white SC with gold WP, or a blue with black WP?

How about brown and donkey?

Sorry, lame joke (check out #thedress on tumblr/twitter/Instagram/FB)

It's amazing how much attention that picture has received and how vehemently people are arguing about it.

 

[in stitches]

V nice Seamaster, especially the shirt.

Srs bsns, Mr. C!

 

[Murlsquirl]

^ All of that.

 

[Claghorn]

 

[heldentenor]

 

[Prince of Paisley]

From earlier this week - I suppose this jacket qualifies? If so I'm in.

 

[Mr. Claymore]



Srs bsns, Mr. C!

Friday Challange ain't time for playin!

 

[Coxsackie]

So, I've been planning on getting a new windowpane SC made. Would you guys go for an off white SC with gold WP, or a blue with black WP?

It's amazing how much attention that picture has received and how vehemently people are arguing about it.

What's interesting about that debate is how it brings up the subject of visual processing, and cortical interpretation, of colour.

Colour is not an inherent property of an object. It is only a reaction within our central nervous system to the light being reflected from that object. The signal our brain receives is entirely dependent upon the fixed set of light-sensitive rods and cones in our retina. Each of the three types of cone cell is optimally sensitive to light at a certain wavelength - in human beings, these three wavelengths correspond to what we call the three "primary" colours: red, yellow and blue.

Everything else to do with colour interpretation occurs at the other end of the optic nerve, within the occipital lobes (and indeed even the frontal lobes) of the brain cortex.



So, what is the "object" in question? In the case of this photo, I would say that the debate has become heated because some people regard the photo as being the object (in which case the colours are clearly a kind of mauve/lavender and a dark beige/tan) whereas others regard the dress as being the object (in which case our tertiary visual processing, noting that the dress is in shadow while the background is over-exposed, comes to a best-guess conclusion that the colours of the dress are white and gold).

How anyone could see "black" in this dress is beyond me - unless they have some kind of dichromatism or colour-blindness.

 

[bienluienapris]

Yesterday, wit one of my few check jacket, it' my entry if it's in :

 

[sansimeon]

 

[FlyingMonkey]

So, what is the "object" in question? In the case of this photo, I would say that the debate has become heated because some people regard the photo as being the object (in which case the colours are clearly a kind of mauve/lavender and a dark beige/tan) whereas others regard the dress as being the object (in which case our tertiary visual processing, noting that the dress is in shadow while the background is over-exposed, comes to a best-guess conclusion that the colours of the dress are white and gold).

How anyone could see "black" in this dress is beyond me - unless they have some kind of dichromatism or colour-blindness.

I've seen this same photo (not different photos of the same dress - the same photo on the same website) on three different screens, in different lighting conditions, and I've seen three different combinations, ranging from white and gold to blue and black. So I can't tell whether it's the contextual lighting or the screen / colour processing settings of the computers, but one thing I am certain of is that it's not (solely) an issue of human optical or neurological hardware. At the very least it is a question of the interaction between one or other or both of those latter things and the former things, if not entirely down to one or other or both the former.

 

[Braddock]

Sorry guys, but here comes the winner:

 

[Cleav]

@Braddock that is ingenious, awsm

 

[Shen]

Sorry guys, but here comes the winner:

Fantastic!

 

[Claghorn]

Brilliant!