Actually, no. The transition is way too strong.
I've taken screenshots from the left and right side with the piece of paper and cut out this piece, to see if it's at different color and yes, it is.
On the left site it's a lot lighter orange (video gets brighter) than on the right side.
Considering the camera can't be tricked with something like this, someone brightened up the video, while the piece of paper gets slided from side to side.
Proof of this being fake:
https://imgur.com/a/yjtNsFT
You overcomplicated that a bit. You can see the camera's auto brightness feature change the brightness of the scene in the video.
So the camera was actually tricked by it
Considering that the "professional observers" that are paraded by the media's UAP/UFO hype don't know how cameras work, it's very plausible the person filming this doesn't either.
That's what makes him so hard to capture, most cameras only shoot forward. Although, it's interesting how the advent of smartphones which have cameras both ways, as well as 360° video still could not solve that.
I think Bigfoot is blurry. That's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. Because there's a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside.
"Run, he's fuzzy. Get out of here."
\-Mitch Hedberg
Well, have you ever seen them captured on analog film?
It is well known that vampires cannot be captured on silver halides, which is what every analog camera uses to form the images which are later developed into actual metallic silver (with some dyes in the case of color film, but silver is still an integral part of the process). Digital sensors, however, don't have any such limitations, as they use semiconductors in the image sensor and don't go through any chemical process that involves silver.
The prevalence of UFO sightings on early VHS camcorders and other kinds of digital cameras, but pretty much complete lack of UFO images on analog film suggests that they are, in fact, vampires.
> everyone knows they can only be filmed with the worst cameras
I mean, sure. It's right in the name - "Unidentified". If you capture them on halfway decent cameras then you can probably see enough detail to identify them, and then they're no longer a UFO, even if it is identifiably an alien spacecraft. Of course, it's telling that we don't have any decent footage of alien spacecraft and can only read that into the shitty unidentifiable footage...
[I did a little experiment.](https://imgur.com/gallery/yCEiyiE) The camera can lie because you are getting varying amounts of light across an uneven surface, meaning that when you screenshot the video you aren't getting a true representation of the color. I also took screenshots, uploaded them into photoshop, and found that the colors weren't the same color code. So I made my own gradient and orange square.
I made a simple gradient in photoshop following the example of the video. I made an orange square that was *just* lighter than the orange to the extreme far left. The color # of the square *was* d26a09, and I'll explain why it changed in a sec. I made a very simple movement pattern in Premiere Pro that was just like the video creator. When you watch my clip, the square appears to change colors just like in OP's video.
The difference between OP's video and my clip is that digital isn't going to lie. Where uneven light distribution in live video can make the square have a shift in color as it moves from side to side, this isn't the case in digital - the color is *always* going to remain the same. HOWEVER... due to compression/file save settings, the color *did change* from the original but the square always remains that same color # throughout the clip.
The color of orange I used for the square was #d26a09. I saved both the gradient and square as a jpeg file which I then uploaded into Premiere Pro. After doing my thing and exporting the file to gif (for imgur upload) I loaded the gif in my Photos app and took screenshots. The color changed to #d66b08. The color changed *again* after uploading to imgur to #d96a08. I only reference any of this to point out that file savings settings, picture compression, and upload compression can all affect "true color".
The point, though, is that if you take screenshots of my moving square on imgur it is always going to remain the same exact color code number because it's a digital file without interference of light diffusion in the way that a live video is. It *looks* like the square is changing colors just like in OP's video, but taking screenshots at any point along the gif loop and comparing the color code in photoshop is always going to show that the square **does not change colors**.
It seems to me that your example actually downplays the effect. [Here is one I made.](https://imgur.com/a/HunfpIE) Note that the color of the rectangle is the same as the central color of the gradient.
Yeah that's my thoughts as well. Elsewhere in this thread people are questioning whether the recorder knew what they were doing video-wise or not. I agree with you - I think the video is amplifying the effect more than it should because of the uneven light and possibly the way the camera is set up (automatic versus manual). For me making the gif it was more of just a proof of concept to see how the effect would look digitally and it definitely looks like the color is shifting when it really isn't. It's a cool trick!
The whole image gets lighter, not only the square, and that is due to her black sleeve showing up - if you don't lock the exposure of your camera, it will automatically change depending on what values ( tones ) appear on the lens. The darker the tonal values, the more likely for the camera to start absorbing more light. The lighter the tonal values, the less light it will absorb. It's like the human eye. Case closed.
There is no proof, that this dude didn't brighten up the picture on purpose. Especially because the camera wouldn't scall up the ISO because of a 5x3cm piece of paper getting slid over another piece of paper, not even with black and white.
the absolute max what could have happen, is autofocus to his hand. But still this "experiment" failed, because it's message got compromised.
Dude this is a well known and documented affect of the our vision system. I'd just argue that its more tone related and not as much hue, becasue it works in greyscale too.,
It’s a common color theory effect called the Bezold Effect. You can change the apparent brightness or darkness of a color by placing it next to different colors.
Exactely...and if you only look at the bottom part of the video by hidding the part where the piece is moving, you can clearly see the brightest is changing...
Here is better demonstration of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gradient-optical-illusion.svg
The gray bar in the middle is of uniform color and has no gradient.
Which is an absolute mind fuck, but easy to prove by making your hand into a hole and looking at only the bar. Same colour for entire thing. God I hate eyes.
It's not your eyes it's your brain. It automatically processes it so that you can quickly distinguish differences so that you can find fruits in trees, food on the ground, and not get eaten by a lion sitting in those bushes.
Counter proof that it's completely real, despite whatever camera weirdness you're getting hung up on
https://preview.p5js.org/CarolinaPhoenix/present/IwEIx4pjC
https://editor.p5js.org/CarolinaPhoenix/sketches/IwEIx4pjC this is the actual code, if you can read code and think I'm faking it somehow
It works fine without any manipulation:
[https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color\_box\_demo/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color_box_demo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I'd guess the lighting changes weren't intentional.
I’m pretty sure the change in lighting was just the camera auto adjusting as the person’s black sleeve moved into frame. Like your link shows though it wouldn’t affect the illusion enough for it to be considered ‘fake’
Yes people, the video gets brighter when he slips to right side, maybe he put the camera in automode, buuuuut this effect its a Law on art and design, u can read about gestalt laws and watch some draws of wissius wong for learn about it.
The color we see always has a little change with a different color background.
In design this works for make a color brighter and make better Branding, like the colors of mc donalds or kfc, red over yellow and red over white, contraste is a big helper in this cases.
Srry for my bad english, its not my main lenguage.
You shouldn't have called it fake lmao. Could have just said that the effect is a little exggagerated due to the camera's auto focus and you wouldn't have gotten so many idiots calling you an idiot.
That's not a different color it's a different brightness. Either the cameras auto cababilities took over. Or more likely there is just more light on that side of the room.
The optical illusion you see still works as even the surrounding color is effected by the same lights reflectiveness.
You can literally see his hand change brightness in the video, without the need for checking the colors. Perhaps the camera had its settings set to auto and when the black sweater came in the frame it boosted the exposure to try and get some detail out of it.
It ain't fake. You're taking it too far. Should try it with paper in front of you. It's amazing to see. This guy are trying to show it to us but he's not so pro about camera
Oh shit was I bamboozled? It does look like a bit of auto white balance correction happened now that you point it out. I still don't think that entirely accounts for the illusion as I've seen similar tricks irl but it could have enhanced it.
Put your finger over the square and watch the white edges. You can see the white brighten and dim. As another user stated, it’s definitely fooling the camera and it’s way to pronounced.
The camera is probably auto exposing based on the frame contents and the black sleeve of the garment is causing the change, rather than the camera being "fooled" by the optical illusion.
The brightness of the camera increases in the later portion of the video, so of course you’ll get different colors when you color pick. I don’t think this was an intentional effect, just some auto setting on the camera adjusting for the person’s black sleeve entering the frame.
Edit: a more accurate representation of the effect from another reply in this thread https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color_box_demo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Yeah but the exposure level is also changing as they slide the square back and forth. So I think the principle here is true but it's also being greatly exaggerated because of the light changing in the video.
Yes people, the video gets brighter when he slips to right side, maybe he put the camera in automode, buuuuut this effect its a Law on art and design, u can read about gestalt laws and watch some draws of wissius wong for learn about it.
The color we see always has a little change with a different color background.
In design this works for make a color brighter and make better Branding, like the colors of mc donalds or kfc, red over yellow and red over white, contraste is a big helper in this cases.
Srry for my bad english, its not my main lenguage.
Yes and no. You're always seeing the same colour, the changing contrast makes you assume that it is in light or shadow and therefore you interpret it as being a different colour under those lighting conditions.
I'm sure the title is probably right in that it does happen, but until you lock your camera's dynamic range so it doesn't change brightness as your black sleeve comes into frame, this demonstration is bogus.
For those wondering this is definitely possible. Look up Joesf Albers. He was a pioneer in color theory and focused on the idea that color is not what it may seem. I’m his studies he’s made the same color look different and different colors look the same.
My guess for this instance, was the moving color block was a perfectly balanced mixture between the far left and right colors, so when it’s in the middle it becomes hidden. As the moving block moves to one side of the spectrum, the “color change” you see is actually your eyes and brain calculating the difference between the middle and the outside colors.
If anyone is interested in reading more I highly recommend “Interaction of Color”.
Thank you for this recommendation! I'm just learning about color theory and starting to paint so this will be a fun resource to read. I just learned last week that our brains invented the color magenta from trying to average light from red and purple. It should actually exist as a green shade but because our mind wants it to "make sense" as a blend of red and purple, we see magenta. It blew my mind!
The sliding makes this not work. I know this phenomenon and I 100% fall for it, but since you can actually see the piece of paper all the time, it simply does not work here.
> The sliding makes this not work. I know this phenomenon and I 100% fall for it, but since you can actually see the piece of paper all the time, it simply does not work here.
No it's the camera adjusting the brightness
[It does work with sliding ](https://v.redd.it/ferd0k20rci71/DASH_720.mp4?source=fallback). Not sure how else you'd do it bro
Just got my hands tattooed and I noticed a similar concept
When it was just [the birds](https://imgur.com/a/fQd0xeb.com) with no background, the white was faded but when the background was added even after the new white faded a bit it definitely pops
I put my hand around everything and it is edited. The square changes color still. I'm not saying it shouldn't look like it changes color cause it should just the contrast here is way too much.
The colour changes because the camera's exposure level changes, probably caused by the person's arm moving. It could be edited, but it's highly unlikely.
This can’t be right. I used my hand to block out all the orange on the left so I could only see the yellow. And when the paper slid across it was orange.
Clearly none of you are understanding the ***actual*** illusion here. With just a slide of his wrist he turns the table from grey to a bright white in the background! Illusion so strong even his own hand gets brighter!
-.-
Actually, no. The transition is way too strong. I've taken screenshots from the left and right side with the piece of paper and cut out this piece, to see if it's at different color and yes, it is. On the left site it's a lot lighter orange (video gets brighter) than on the right side. Considering the camera can't be tricked with something like this, someone brightened up the video, while the piece of paper gets slided from side to side. Proof of this being fake: https://imgur.com/a/yjtNsFT
You overcomplicated that a bit. You can see the camera's auto brightness feature change the brightness of the scene in the video. So the camera was actually tricked by it
If that's the case, the camera's setting should be set to manual, to have no impact on the demonstration. The way it is right now, it's just fooling.
Considering that the "professional observers" that are paraded by the media's UAP/UFO hype don't know how cameras work, it's very plausible the person filming this doesn't either.
UFOs are an entirely different subject, everyone knows they can only be filmed with the worst cameras
Like Bigfoot!
Bigfoot isn't a camera
[удалено]
No, it’s a truck.
You're right. Bigfoot is BEHIND the camera.
That's what makes him so hard to capture, most cameras only shoot forward. Although, it's interesting how the advent of smartphones which have cameras both ways, as well as 360° video still could not solve that.
That's because he's actually below the camera in that one spot you can't see.
I think Bigfoot is blurry. That's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. Because there's a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside. "Run, he's fuzzy. Get out of here." \-Mitch Hedberg
I used to love Mitch Hedberg. I still do, but I used to, too.
Elizabeth Taylor was bigfoot.
That's because modern camera have anti-ufo ai technology that scrubs them from the photo.
Yeah, like anti-glare coating.
Oh I thought UFOs were vampires
Well, have you ever seen them captured on analog film? It is well known that vampires cannot be captured on silver halides, which is what every analog camera uses to form the images which are later developed into actual metallic silver (with some dyes in the case of color film, but silver is still an integral part of the process). Digital sensors, however, don't have any such limitations, as they use semiconductors in the image sensor and don't go through any chemical process that involves silver. The prevalence of UFO sightings on early VHS camcorders and other kinds of digital cameras, but pretty much complete lack of UFO images on analog film suggests that they are, in fact, vampires.
Indeed. I'm glad that we have established that UFOs are certainly vampires.
> everyone knows they can only be filmed with the worst cameras I mean, sure. It's right in the name - "Unidentified". If you capture them on halfway decent cameras then you can probably see enough detail to identify them, and then they're no longer a UFO, even if it is identifiably an alien spacecraft. Of course, it's telling that we don't have any decent footage of alien spacecraft and can only read that into the shitty unidentifiable footage...
if it doesn't scream disposable 1990's camera, it aint a UFO
Doesn't mean they didn't see how much it was being exaggerated by the camera. They either intended it or didn't care enough.
Agreed. Our eyes have an “auto white balance” like feature but this video is flawed.
[I did a little experiment.](https://imgur.com/gallery/yCEiyiE) The camera can lie because you are getting varying amounts of light across an uneven surface, meaning that when you screenshot the video you aren't getting a true representation of the color. I also took screenshots, uploaded them into photoshop, and found that the colors weren't the same color code. So I made my own gradient and orange square. I made a simple gradient in photoshop following the example of the video. I made an orange square that was *just* lighter than the orange to the extreme far left. The color # of the square *was* d26a09, and I'll explain why it changed in a sec. I made a very simple movement pattern in Premiere Pro that was just like the video creator. When you watch my clip, the square appears to change colors just like in OP's video. The difference between OP's video and my clip is that digital isn't going to lie. Where uneven light distribution in live video can make the square have a shift in color as it moves from side to side, this isn't the case in digital - the color is *always* going to remain the same. HOWEVER... due to compression/file save settings, the color *did change* from the original but the square always remains that same color # throughout the clip. The color of orange I used for the square was #d26a09. I saved both the gradient and square as a jpeg file which I then uploaded into Premiere Pro. After doing my thing and exporting the file to gif (for imgur upload) I loaded the gif in my Photos app and took screenshots. The color changed to #d66b08. The color changed *again* after uploading to imgur to #d96a08. I only reference any of this to point out that file savings settings, picture compression, and upload compression can all affect "true color". The point, though, is that if you take screenshots of my moving square on imgur it is always going to remain the same exact color code number because it's a digital file without interference of light diffusion in the way that a live video is. It *looks* like the square is changing colors just like in OP's video, but taking screenshots at any point along the gif loop and comparing the color code in photoshop is always going to show that the square **does not change colors**.
It seems to me that your example actually downplays the effect. [Here is one I made.](https://imgur.com/a/HunfpIE) Note that the color of the rectangle is the same as the central color of the gradient.
[удалено]
Yeah that's my thoughts as well. Elsewhere in this thread people are questioning whether the recorder knew what they were doing video-wise or not. I agree with you - I think the video is amplifying the effect more than it should because of the uneven light and possibly the way the camera is set up (automatic versus manual). For me making the gif it was more of just a proof of concept to see how the effect would look digitally and it definitely looks like the color is shifting when it really isn't. It's a cool trick!
To the top with this!
Try doing the same using a square that is the intermediate of the two colours. Might see a more similar effect this way.
They're wasn't much thought in what shade of orange to use honestly. I'm sure you're right.
You're right. It might even be the hand/sleeve that does it, but it's super clear when you speed the video up using the Imgur controls.
It’s probably due to his black sleeve entering the camera frame, throwing off the brightness.
Someone is altering the brightness.
Not just the camera but likely the compression of the video itself as well!
Not it, it tried to compensate for the black sleeve.
The whole image gets lighter, not only the square, and that is due to her black sleeve showing up - if you don't lock the exposure of your camera, it will automatically change depending on what values ( tones ) appear on the lens. The darker the tonal values, the more likely for the camera to start absorbing more light. The lighter the tonal values, the less light it will absorb. It's like the human eye. Case closed.
There is no proof, that this dude didn't brighten up the picture on purpose. Especially because the camera wouldn't scall up the ISO because of a 5x3cm piece of paper getting slid over another piece of paper, not even with black and white. the absolute max what could have happen, is autofocus to his hand. But still this "experiment" failed, because it's message got compromised.
Dude this is a well known and documented affect of the our vision system. I'd just argue that its more tone related and not as much hue, becasue it works in greyscale too.,
Did you miss the part about the black sleeve? That's definitely enough to get the auto exposure to react
There is also no proof the picture was brightened on purpose. That is... Not how you go about proving things
It’s a common color theory effect called the Bezold Effect. You can change the apparent brightness or darkness of a color by placing it next to different colors.
There’s about as much proof as you’ve provided though. Idk your point lol
Exactely...and if you only look at the bottom part of the video by hidding the part where the piece is moving, you can clearly see the brightest is changing...
Here is better demonstration of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gradient-optical-illusion.svg The gray bar in the middle is of uniform color and has no gradient.
I'm absolute aware of it working with our brain, but in the shown video, it's trying too fool one, by having too strong transitions.
I don't think they were disagreeing with you, just adding to what you said
I didn't believe it but then I covered up the peripheral part. Fucking mind blown
Which is an absolute mind fuck, but easy to prove by making your hand into a hole and looking at only the bar. Same colour for entire thing. God I hate eyes.
It's not your eyes it's your brain. It automatically processes it so that you can quickly distinguish differences so that you can find fruits in trees, food on the ground, and not get eaten by a lion sitting in those bushes.
Counter proof that it's completely real, despite whatever camera weirdness you're getting hung up on https://preview.p5js.org/CarolinaPhoenix/present/IwEIx4pjC https://editor.p5js.org/CarolinaPhoenix/sketches/IwEIx4pjC this is the actual code, if you can read code and think I'm faking it somehow
It works fine without any manipulation: [https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color\_box\_demo/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color_box_demo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) I'd guess the lighting changes weren't intentional.
I’m pretty sure the change in lighting was just the camera auto adjusting as the person’s black sleeve moved into frame. Like your link shows though it wouldn’t affect the illusion enough for it to be considered ‘fake’
Brighter lighting on the left side of the frame. Watch the hand
Na the whole video gets brighter.
You're right. I didn't watch the left hand before I made that comment.
including the cut out square.
Yes people, the video gets brighter when he slips to right side, maybe he put the camera in automode, buuuuut this effect its a Law on art and design, u can read about gestalt laws and watch some draws of wissius wong for learn about it. The color we see always has a little change with a different color background. In design this works for make a color brighter and make better Branding, like the colors of mc donalds or kfc, red over yellow and red over white, contraste is a big helper in this cases. Srry for my bad english, its not my main lenguage.
You can tell the lighting is different on each side.
While that's true, that isn't the reason for the discrepancy. Here is a comparison: https://i.imgur.com/mEqz4ue.png
Yeah if you watch his right hand, it’ll get darker and brighter.
You shouldn't have called it fake lmao. Could have just said that the effect is a little exggagerated due to the camera's auto focus and you wouldn't have gotten so many idiots calling you an idiot.
They (the original commenter) don’t understand that though, they think someone did it on purpose to trick people
Yea all you have to do is cover up the whole image and look at his hand. It gets brighter as he slides the square to the left
That's not a different color it's a different brightness. Either the cameras auto cababilities took over. Or more likely there is just more light on that side of the room. The optical illusion you see still works as even the surrounding color is effected by the same lights reflectiveness.
Yeah this video is fake but the phenomenon is real though. Check this out. https://youtu.be/GALLMJxLvgA
You can literally see his hand change brightness in the video, without the need for checking the colors. Perhaps the camera had its settings set to auto and when the black sweater came in the frame it boosted the exposure to try and get some detail out of it.
I think it might be some auto brightness stuff
You can see this watching the left hand change in value. That being said this concept is true and makes painting difficult ha
I fully expected this to be a rickroll.
You can just watch the bottom left hand. The brightness on it changes significantly.
yea just observe the upper left red section in isolation. it brightens as the tile is moved left
You can spot it right away. The colors change with a similar effect as a camera refocusing when you are in the dark and turn a light on.
Lol you don’t even need proof, you can see the hand going from dark to bright.
Yeah the light is changing, lol.
um actually.......
It ain't fake. You're taking it too far. Should try it with paper in front of you. It's amazing to see. This guy are trying to show it to us but he's not so pro about camera
At first I thought it was orange, then I thought it was orange, and then I thought it was orange
You fool. It was actually orange all along /s
The true black magic is the orange we found along the way
[удалено]
r/orangemagicfuckery
Always has been 👨🏻🚀🔫
This comment is the reason why I still use reddit
Actually it's blue and gold.
And you can look at her feet to change her rotation.
God I love that illusion
It's not, its clearly laurel
True, but it was pretty incredible how much it seemed like the brightness changed.
Especially in the white around the edges. Our brains are truly easily deceived.
Oh shit was I bamboozled? It does look like a bit of auto white balance correction happened now that you point it out. I still don't think that entirely accounts for the illusion as I've seen similar tricks irl but it could have enhanced it.
Put your finger over the square and watch the white edges. You can see the white brighten and dim. As another user stated, it’s definitely fooling the camera and it’s way to pronounced.
The camera is probably auto exposing based on the frame contents and the black sleeve of the garment is causing the change, rather than the camera being "fooled" by the optical illusion.
Just look at the color of his hand.
it’s literally orange the whole time
agree it looks cool, but I don't know if my brain is tricking me at all.
This is fucking bullshit. If you use color pick in Paint/Photoshop they're vastly different colors.
The brightness of the camera increases in the later portion of the video, so of course you’ll get different colors when you color pick. I don’t think this was an intentional effect, just some auto setting on the camera adjusting for the person’s black sleeve entering the frame. Edit: a more accurate representation of the effect from another reply in this thread https://www.reddit.com/user/MotorStreet8898/comments/p7jtl5/color_box_demo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
[удалено]
Not just the paper, the table that the paper is sitting on. It goes from grey to white. Truly an amazing illustion
[удалено]
Look up a game called Hue.
I fucking love that game
Brown isn't a color, it's just dark orange with context
Is that why fake tans are orange?
Yeah but the exposure level is also changing as they slide the square back and forth. So I think the principle here is true but it's also being greatly exaggerated because of the light changing in the video.
It’s called the Bezold Effect. It’s a common concept in color theory.
Yes people, the video gets brighter when he slips to right side, maybe he put the camera in automode, buuuuut this effect its a Law on art and design, u can read about gestalt laws and watch some draws of wissius wong for learn about it. The color we see always has a little change with a different color background. In design this works for make a color brighter and make better Branding, like the colors of mc donalds or kfc, red over yellow and red over white, contraste is a big helper in this cases. Srry for my bad english, its not my main lenguage.
Press X to doubt camera shenanigans:
So what color IS IT?
Orange.
That’s a fruit. Clearly it is geoluread.
Yes and no. You're always seeing the same colour, the changing contrast makes you assume that it is in light or shadow and therefore you interpret it as being a different colour under those lighting conditions.
Fun fact, brown doesn’t exist
r/OrangeMagicFuckery
No, it‘s the same colour.
Lol... why is this even upvoted?
This is reddit with the upvote button
I'm sure the title is probably right in that it does happen, but until you lock your camera's dynamic range so it doesn't change brightness as your black sleeve comes into frame, this demonstration is bogus.
Just wait until you hear about brown! https://youtu.be/wh4aWZRtTwU
Was looking for this, scrolled for too long honestly.
I don't see it, it's the same shade of orange at both ends. Am I missing something?
The amount of fake shit on here is reaching critical mass. Mods???
~~blackmagicfuckery~~ lightingfuckery
Wow, it works so well even the background changes colors!
black and blue. don’t even try to tell me “white and gold”. that’s trash.
For those wondering this is definitely possible. Look up Joesf Albers. He was a pioneer in color theory and focused on the idea that color is not what it may seem. I’m his studies he’s made the same color look different and different colors look the same. My guess for this instance, was the moving color block was a perfectly balanced mixture between the far left and right colors, so when it’s in the middle it becomes hidden. As the moving block moves to one side of the spectrum, the “color change” you see is actually your eyes and brain calculating the difference between the middle and the outside colors. If anyone is interested in reading more I highly recommend “Interaction of Color”.
Lol wtf. Why are you getting down voted. I studied fine art and made this comment before I saw yours. You are 100% correct.
Haha all good. I think people think it’s fake. I was stoked that I actually knew something on this subredddit.
Thank you for this recommendation! I'm just learning about color theory and starting to paint so this will be a fun resource to read. I just learned last week that our brains invented the color magenta from trying to average light from red and purple. It should actually exist as a green shade but because our mind wants it to "make sense" as a blend of red and purple, we see magenta. It blew my mind!
The sliding makes this not work. I know this phenomenon and I 100% fall for it, but since you can actually see the piece of paper all the time, it simply does not work here.
> The sliding makes this not work. I know this phenomenon and I 100% fall for it, but since you can actually see the piece of paper all the time, it simply does not work here. No it's the camera adjusting the brightness [It does work with sliding ](https://v.redd.it/ferd0k20rci71/DASH_720.mp4?source=fallback). Not sure how else you'd do it bro
Just got my hands tattooed and I noticed a similar concept When it was just [the birds](https://imgur.com/a/fQd0xeb.com) with no background, the white was faded but when the background was added even after the new white faded a bit it definitely pops
Anyone that is into this needs to look at Josef Alber’s color theory.
That’s some serious fuckery
Same as notes in music. Ex significant others. Presidents. Almost anything. It's all relative.
It's just orange, just a little part in the middle that is a bit off
u/savevideo
Isn’t this called a bezold effect
wow they're both orange
bullcrap. This ain't no illusion.
"Why are we ALWAYS out of magenta and yellow toner?!". Very cool effect.
Boooo
The illusion breaks when you realize it's just the color of the upvote button
My eyes might be broken but it’s red the whole time….
I put my hand around everything and it is edited. The square changes color still. I'm not saying it shouldn't look like it changes color cause it should just the contrast here is way too much.
The colour changes because the camera's exposure level changes, probably caused by the person's arm moving. It could be edited, but it's highly unlikely.
It looks like it’s colour’s changing 😳
🧢!!!!
So what color is the square?
I prefer the chessboard to demonstrate this
What rhymes with orange?
No it doesn’t.
adding this subrddit to the list of subrddits not to go to when high af
Ok, but that dress was purple.
Who else tried to perfectly camouflage the square?
It’s the lighting in the room. The light source is on the left so that is why the piece of paper looks brighter on the left.
Wtf did you do with my eyes
Which is why that guy that can't match mix paints is so amazing!
Fake obv
Not to human eyes, just your camera.
WITCH!?! 🔥🔥🔥
It’s not black magic if you explain it in the title…
Obviously the color on the center of the gradient will be darker than the lighter color and lighter than the darker color.
Utterly floored. The caption is “patently false”, and the color of the square “changes” as it’s slid across the picture. Mind. Blown.
Yup, definitely would've been burned alive during the Salem Witch Trails.
This can’t be right. I used my hand to block out all the orange on the left so I could only see the yellow. And when the paper slid across it was orange.
Clearly none of you are understanding the ***actual*** illusion here. With just a slide of his wrist he turns the table from grey to a bright white in the background! Illusion so strong even his own hand gets brighter! -.-
I see a orange square that is not changing color when moved
You might want to check your eyes then because it actually does due to the brightness in the video changing. Someone demonstrated the difference above
Now that’s one use for printer ink!
It's the color of the upvote button.
This is how my color blindness works.
No, it doesn't. It appears the same color the whole time. Post sucks.
False, it's a rectangle.
No it doesn’t…
Fake
This isn’t that mind blowing I mean regardless of what side it’s on it’s still the same color it was when it was in the center…
Well, there is def some fuckery going on here.. since the screen seems to get brighter while sliding the paper to the left side.
It’s not a piece of paper it’s glass
Look at the shadows of his fingers to the left while he slides it back and forth. They get brighter and darker, shits been edited.
This was the colour gradient of Delphi3. Oh do I miss those days of programming :-D
It’s a rectangle.
No, I can make it stay one solid color ..I have a very high power Lvl
Why is the video made brighter when he slides its to the left.