optical illusions

[jwgh]

brought to my attention by boutell.

Optical illusions from eChalk

For me the first one is the most extraordinary; I had to take a screen capture and move bits of the image around to believe that it was actually true. Illusion 3 also seriously broke my brane.

Comments

[margo-virago.livejournal.com]

that hurtsis my brains.

[penelope-arcade.livejournal.com]

lol, i was going to say the same thing

[cgoldfish.livejournal.com]

if you focus on the fact that the one that looks lighter is in a shadow - and then look at the two of them together - you can tell they're the same color. just compare the lighter one IN the shadow with one out of the shadow. that should do the trick.

at least, it does for me.

[saucypunk.livejournal.com]

good stuff. i couldn't believe #3...

[paperclippy.livejournal.com]

Wow. I don't think there is anything else I can say.

[junquegrrl.livejournal.com]

holy fuck!

[annarama.livejournal.com]

omg, that's driving me crazy. :)

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

Understanding Illusion 3 has a lot to do with answering the question "Why can't I get my digital photos to print out with the right colors?"

[glitter-ninja.livejournal.com]

#3 kind of makes sense, when you realize both pictures consist of purple and yellow. But #1 is still hurting my poor widdle head.

[paracelsvs.livejournal.com]

The first illusion is an excellent one that I've enjoyed ever since I first saw it.

However, #3 is a bit questionable. The image actually shows two crosses with different-coloured center pieces. There just happens to be tow pieces of coloured film in the way. The fact that the colours of the films are picked to make the center pieces the exact same colour when photographed (or in this case, computer rendered) ends up seeming sort of besides the point. It's like setting up a huge, perfectly planned and executed scheme to trick somebody, and then somehow thinking it was UTTERLY SURPRISING that they were tricked.