• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Optical Illusions Thread

Stormkhan said:
Good ol' A.I.
An increase in optical illusions beyond the wit of humans.
Click to expand...
Except this human . . . :points: Suddenly discovered that by shrinking the image down, that the hidden message becomes extremely clear! Weird stuff aye!
1704998296463.png
 
Sid said:
Except this human . . . :points: Suddenly discovered that by shrinking the image down, that the hidden message becomes extremely clear! Weird stuff aye!
View attachment 72861
Click to expand...

How do you know that it's human made? It wouldn't work if the lighting was not right.

Sorry, I currently can't use emojis, but I am curious as to how you found this out, not criticizing your comment.
 
All I'm thinking is how big can you get away with making it, do whoever made it make others, and can you get them poster sized.
 
How do you know that it's human made? It wouldn't work if the lighting was not right.
Click to expand...
In fairness, there's (I assume) human made chalk drawings on pavements which look like a massive pit or set of stairs, which would only work by the witness looking from a particular vantage point.
 
I've found, if you're looking at it on your phone, if you tilt the image in almost any direction the words begin to appear. Not as clearly as seeing it from a distance.
 
Peripart said:
Clever! I moved back 2m at first, but that's testing my focus (mildly short-sighted), but as I edged back in, it became clear. Now it's hard to unsee it.
Click to expand...

Thinking (or more likely, over-thinking) about this one, I wonder if the effect is similar to those illusions where one picture changes into another as you get closer or further away. The most commonly seen one involves Marilyn Monroe turning into Einstein.
 
brownmane said:
(Q #1.) How do you know that it's human made? (Q #2.) It wouldn't work if the lighting was not right.

Sorry, I currently can't use emojis, but I am curious as to (Q #3.) how you found this out, not criticizing your comment.
Click to expand...

(Answer to Q #1.)
The phrase “the stones will cry out” - turns out it happens to be a biblical reference from the New Testament.
"I happened to find this out as I'd stated in my post. . ."
(Answer to Q #2.)
Unless the stones were lit from the front, (say at sunrise, or at sunset) the message would always cast a shadow upon rounded edged stones. But as it's more probable that any light would be emitted on to it from above, the readable shadowy passage would always be visible in some form.
(Answer to Q #3.)
[Except this human . . . :points: Suddenly discovered that by shrinking the image down, that the hidden message becomes extremely clear! Weird stuff aye!]
*A factor of perspective I guess, as my quick sketch shows (below) not only the image is made smaller, but also the distance between the content within the image (makes it appear darker, and therefore highlights the hidden text.
1705068041657.png
 
Last edited:
TangletwigsDeux said:
I cant embed directly to this one so heres a direct link to reddit:

Head goes bang.
Click to expand...
That's really confusing. I think it's got a lot to do with the colours - in the fact that the centre arrows also change there direction and colour which tends to draw the viewers attention to colour influences on each of the coloured wheels (which don't change position in any way, even though they tend to make it appear that they both wobble and move towards, and away from each other.)
Clever stuff!
1706457540084.png
 
Sid said:
That's really confusing. I think it's got a lot to do with the colours - in the fact that the centre arrows also change there direction and colour which tends to draw the viewers attention to colour influences on each of the coloured wheels (which don't change position in any way, even though they tend to make it appear that they both wobble and move towards, and away from each other.)
Clever stuff! View attachment 73389
Click to expand...
I covered the arrows with my thumb nail and it didn't stop any effects.
 
Floyd1 said:
I covered the arrows with my thumb nail and it didn't stop any effects.
Click to expand...
Yes, and it doesn't stop. Probably the colours take over to give the same effect (as the lighter colours will grab attention more.) i.e. It must come down to both colours, and arrows being capable of the same deception. (Sneaky!)
1706541616778.png
 
Last edited:
Interesting one from the landing page for my internet browser. The nine "most visited" icons are in a completely straight horizontal line and always have been. But against the wallpaper picture of the boat where its sides curve up to the prow.... the first visual impression is that the icons are in a curve as well, that follows the lines of the boat. It takes a longer look before you realise they're in the same straight line as always, and not curving up to the left.

1707473832305.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Yithian said:
I can 'cancel' the urge to see movement here—but it's hard work!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765446310000312441
Click to expand...
This one is highly effective. . . I think the suggestive part with the arrows seems to play there part in a suggestive effect in the box's apparent rotation. It appears the 3D aspect of the box and the combination of white, and dark lines make our brain strongly register it's position, but weaker when it's only the black framework, I think that makes us believe that you are 'seeing' the box rotating through the 3D axis' to give the impression (to the brain) that it is turning. "Clever, and hard to try to work out how this one works"
 
Last edited:
Pieter Breughel the Elder's 1568 painting The Magpie on the Gallows features an optical illusion in the structure of the scaffold.
The feet line up in opposition the the crossbeam. It's an impossible object.

Rather like the sign I snapped at Hest Bank near Morecambe a few years ago and posted upthread.
#385
 

Attachments

  • magpie on the gallows.jpg
    magpie on the gallows.jpg
    369.1 KB · Views: 56
escargot said:
Pieter Breughel the Elder's 1568 painting The Magpie on the Gallows features an optical illusion in the structure of the scaffold.
The feet line up in opposition the the crossbeam. It's an impossible object.

Rather like the sign I snapped at Hest Bank near Morecambe a few years ago and posted upthread.
#385
Click to expand...
Not sure if it's an 'impossible object' - rather more of a big (or a deliberate intention) within the painting, with not giving the right-hand gallows support enough depth of right side leg support, or enough shadow to make the definition of enough distance difference?
It certainly is a very odd and maybe a very purposeful way to depict it like that!
My thoughts are that maybe the artist really did mean to depict it that way, simply because of the presence of the Magpie?
*Afterall. . . 'Ten ~ a surprise ~ you should be careful not to miss!'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_for_Sorrow_(nursery_rhyme)
Apparently, it was said that as the Magpie represented the Devil when Jesus was crucified on the cross (as depicted within the painting), both a Dove and a Magpie came to sit upon the cross!
 
Last edited:
Franceso Borrowmini's forced perspective gallery in the Palazzo Spada in Rome.

Giving the impression of being 120 feet deep, it's actually only 29 and the figure at the end is only 3 feet tall.

The floor rises, the ceiling comes down and the columns get shorter.

FB.jpg
 
Frideswide said:
FABULOUS!!!!! I wonder why? Easter egg? Joke? I can't see it as an accident
Click to expand...
I pondered this as well and came to the same conclusion that it is intentional. I wonder if the artist was interested to see who actually saw his work and enjoyed it.

There are many people who will go to art galleries and talk about the art they see, but fewer who spend time with a work just to experience it and find the joy in one special piece.

From @Sid's wiki link:
"There is considerable variation in the lyrics used. A common modern version is:
One for sorrow,
Two for joy,"
Click to expand...

In this particular piece, I see there is a second magpie (?) at the foot of the odd gallows. I wonder if this is part of the reason for the weird perspective? It is called "Magpie on the Gallows", but is the second magpie also just as important?
 
Last edited:
brownmane said:
There are many people who will go to art galleries and talk about the art they see, but fewer who spend time with a work just to experience it and find the joy in one special piece.
Click to expand...
How d'you know that then? Plenty of people certainly do stop to enjoy particular works over others. I've seen this during every gallery visit I've made.

brownmane said:
It is called "Magpie on the Gallows"
Click to expand...
We don't know its title for sure. There is no surviving documentation about it.

Some of Breughel's works have a self-evident title, such as 'Flemish Proverbs', although there is no evidence that it was really called that and it is known by other names.
It's certainly a work to study and enjoy. :)
 
escargot said:
How d'you know that then? Plenty of people certainly do stop to enjoy particular works over others. I've seen this during every gallery visit I've made.


We don't know its title for sure. There is no surviving documentation about it.

Some of Breughel's works have a self-evident title, such as 'Flemish Proverbs', although there is no evidence that it was really called that and it is known by other names.
It's certainly a work to study and enjoy. :)
Click to expand...
I just took the name from bottom of the photo posted. I thought that it was the title.

I never discredited that people enjoy pieces of art, I just commented that many people visit galleries and fewer take time (or have the time) to enjoy one piece.
Many people who go to galleries are tourists. That is, they do not have easy nor regular access to the gallery visited and so try to see as much as possible, unless they know of a piece that is there that they want to see. That is what I mean by fewer people spending time enjoying one piece.
 
brownmane said:
I pondered this as well and came to the same conclusion that it is intentional. I wonder if the artist was interested to see who actually saw his work and enjoyed it.

There are many people who will go to art galleries and talk about the art they see, but fewer who spend time with a work just to experience it and find the joy in one special piece.

From @Sid's wiki link:
"There is considerable variation in the lyrics used. A common modern version is:


In this particular piece, I see there is a second magpie (?) at the foot of the odd gallows. I wonder if this is part of the reason for the weird perspective? It is called "Magpie on the Gallows", but is the second magpie also just as important?
Click to expand...
There is one picture I found online. . . https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Piero_della_Francesca_-_Nativity_-_WGA17620.jpg
which shows that a Magpie also being depicted at the birth of Christ, so maybe one Magpie represents birth, and the other as representation of death? Apparently, the painting of the 'Magpie on the Gallows' is one-of-two- halves, (the centre of the Magpie on top of the gallows being in the centre of the painting), so that may be the allusive reason why there are two Magpies. Also - the Artist died shortly after completing this painting ~ another reason why it might reflect the symbolic meanings between life and of death?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top