Right. Since we have no context, the dress is white and gold objectively. Assuming context of the color of the light is incorrect, we don’t have it. The dress is actually black and purple but the image is doctored to be white and gold. So it’s white and gold. The image is not the object. We’re talking about the image, not the object.
Zooming up on the checker, it’s objectively gray. Zooming out, it’s objectively white. The only correct interpretation is the shadow darkens the image. But in the dress picture, we don’t know what the color of the light is, so it’s not comparable.
Since we have no context, the dress is white and gold objectively.
The actual physical object photographed is black and blue.
White and gold appear when the brain makes the assumption that the dress falls within a shadow (effectively applying a filter that shifts the white balance towards bluer colors and brightness down significantly compared to direct sunlight). Only in real life, the photographed dress did not fall within a shadow, and instead was affected by a yellowish lens flare, so the subconscious color correction that leads a viewer to assume white and gold was erroneously applied.
I see white and gold. But to claim that it’s “objectively” white and gold ignores how the human brain perceives color and ignores that the actual photograph was a blue and black dress.
Why do you assume it’s a yellow tint? What if all the objects in the back are simply yellow?
The actual object is blue, the actual photograph is white. They are two separate concepts. We only think it’s blue because we were told - how do we even know that’s true, have you seen the dress in person? Using a color picker is the only objective solution that doesn’t rely on flawed interference.
Depends on whether I zoom in so the color fills the screen or not. This doesn’t change the color values that appear on the screen.
It sounds like you’re agreeing with me that color perception relies on context, not just the color code of the pixel on the screen.
Right. Since we have no context, the dress is white and gold objectively. Assuming context of the color of the light is incorrect, we don’t have it. The dress is actually black and purple but the image is doctored to be white and gold. So it’s white and gold. The image is not the object. We’re talking about the image, not the object.
Zooming up on the checker, it’s objectively gray. Zooming out, it’s objectively white. The only correct interpretation is the shadow darkens the image. But in the dress picture, we don’t know what the color of the light is, so it’s not comparable.
The actual physical object photographed is black and blue.
White and gold appear when the brain makes the assumption that the dress falls within a shadow (effectively applying a filter that shifts the white balance towards bluer colors and brightness down significantly compared to direct sunlight). Only in real life, the photographed dress did not fall within a shadow, and instead was affected by a yellowish lens flare, so the subconscious color correction that leads a viewer to assume white and gold was erroneously applied.
I see white and gold. But to claim that it’s “objectively” white and gold ignores how the human brain perceives color and ignores that the actual photograph was a blue and black dress.
Why do you assume it’s a yellow tint? What if all the objects in the back are simply yellow?
The actual object is blue, the actual photograph is white. They are two separate concepts. We only think it’s blue because we were told - how do we even know that’s true, have you seen the dress in person? Using a color picker is the only objective solution that doesn’t rely on flawed interference.