I see a medium blue. Not brilliant royal blue, but definitely blue. Darker than sky blue, darker than a faded denim. Dark periwinkle.

The lace is a dark chocolate, brownish-black.

I cannot for the life of me see white. No matter how many different screens I use, what angle I look at it, how much I squint or what part of the picture I focus. At best, the version someone posted a few pages back that looked way overexposed, looked like a faded blue and dark goldish-brown. Not white, though, not at all.

We can all agree it is butt fugly, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: oh come on PP.I'm a blue-seer, but if you don't think lighting affects color, you have never edited a photo in your life. The dress is objectively blue because there are other photos in other lighting that show it to be blue, not because someone used a color picker function on a badly lit picture in a piece of software.

White / gold seer here, and I get that the actual dress is a fairly dark blue and black, but what I'm curious about is what colors are in THIS picture. I'd love for the blue/black folks to chime in on what they mean by 'blue'. Are we talking a pale blue or the saturated blue of the other pictures?

Regardless I'm really looking forward to the biologist chiming in on what genetic differences lead to these perceptual variations.

Periwinkle blue, almost lavender. But clearly blue. So weird that it could look white to anyone. Maybe a male female thing?

I saw white and gold. Very white, very gold.

Then I looked up this story and I saw the woman wearing the dress, it was clearly blue and black.

Now when I see the original picture again, it's like a blue with a faded black/brown/gold

If you see it as black, is it at least a really washed out black?

Anonymous wrote: oh come on PP.I'm a blue-seer, but if you don't think lighting affects color, you have never edited a photo in your life. The dress is objectively blue because there are other photos in other lighting that show it to be blue, not because someone used a color picker function on a badly lit picture in a piece of software.

White / gold seer here, and I get that the actual dress is a fairly dark blue and black, but what I'm curious about is what colors are in THIS picture. I'd love for the blue/black folks to chime in on what they mean by 'blue'. Are we talking a pale blue or the saturated blue of the other pictures?

Regardless I'm really looking forward to the biologist chiming in on what genetic differences lead to these perceptual variations.

oh come on PP.I'm a blue-seer, but if you don't think lighting affects color, you have never edited a photo in your life. The dress is objectively blue because there are other photos in other lighting that show it to be blue, not because someone used a color picker function on a badly lit picture in a piece of software.

Someone on the internet analyzed the color with Photoshop and found this



Mystery solved. Those are OBJECTIVELY the colors. If you see anything else your eyes are playing tricks on you.

Anonymous wrote:It's periwinkle and brownish. Anyone who says otherwise is being lied to by their eyes.

I agree with the above!

It's periwinkle and brownish. Anyone who says otherwise is being lied to by their eyes.

OK, it's more purple and chocolate to me... like lavender and a milk choc bar

Anonymous wrote:

You blue/black people are insane

sorry, it is a blue and black dress. see wired article. I for the life of me can't see white and gold.

I read the wired article, and I believe them, but I still can't see blue/black. I only see white/gold.

blue/black np here. Of course they are different blacks. All blacks are different in textiles (ever try to match a random pair of black pants and a black jacket that aren't designed to be a suit?) The black of the lace is not the sameas the black of the chair. But the lace on the dress is not gold.

Those of us who see the dress as blue/black are compensating for the way the photograph washes out the dress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You blue/black people are insane

sorry, it is a blue and black dress. see wired article. I for the life of me can't see white and gold.

You're saying the "black" you see in the dress, is the same as the black in the pattern *behind* the dress? Do you really not see the difference?

The black lace is a bit overexposed, yes. The body of the dress is blue. Blue. Blue.

Then you need your eyes checked, if there isn't a very clear differentiation between the black pattern in the dress behind, and what you perceive as black lace on the dress in the forefront.

I'm not talking about what the "actual" color is, but perception is everything. If you can't differentiate between the colors, something's wrong with your vision.

So weird. It's clearly blue and black/brown. The retailer has weighed in.