• Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Something feels manipulated about this, but it also feels like the author/photographer went out of their way to make sure you couldn’t prove it was manipulated

    • GreenShimada@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      23 days ago

      What you’re likely seeing as throwing you off is differences because this is an actual human wearing this - PLUS it’s essentially an optical illusion. This isn’t 3 versions of the same image with just the pattern changed. So yeah, these are actually not perfectly matching up if you overlay them on top of each other. I wouldn’t say manipulated per se, just that they’re 3 different images so they’ll have some differences.

      • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        22 days ago

        I agree with you, but if you measure the width of the dress at the tip of her fingers, the left and right are about 99-100 pixels, while the middle one is 105 pixels wide. Her face in all three images is about 38-39 pixels wide (measured at the earlobe), so that rules out they stretched the entire image slightly. But 5 pixels is significant enough to kind of muddy the validity of the OP’s message since it no longer rules out all but the appearance of the dress. It sadly happens that sometimes effects are exaggerated, even when there is a real effect at play.

        • GreenShimada@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 days ago

          Yeah, for sure. When I did the overlay I noticed the hands didn’t match up, so I had to look close at the pose to see it’s 3 different images with 3 different real dresses. Sort of defeats the purpose of doing this entirely.

    • rdri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 days ago

      If you zoom in and measure distances in pixels you’ll see it’s manipulated.

  • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    23 days ago

    First one: I better watch out, she’ll call a foul on me

    Second one: I better watch out, she’s probably a felon on the run

    Third one: I can’t watch out because I don’t know where she is

  • Komodo Rodeo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    23 days ago

    (from left to right) a) trying to look slim b) about to escape from prison in 1930 c) trying to confound enemy nation’s Navy

  • Smoogs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    23 days ago

    It’s funny how they also represent an era. Vertical stripes=50s horizontal=90s/early 2000s, slanted =futurama

  • MissJinx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    It’s not the clothes that make you fat, it’s the nutritional choices lack of ozempic

  • daannii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    22 days ago

    Razzle dazzle camouflage!

    I’m genuinely surprised so many people are familiar with this.

    It’s something talked about in perception courses/classes.

    The lines make it difficult for humans and machines to accurately gauge depth perception.

    For humans it’s related to mach bands. And the way lateral inhibition works.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_bands https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lateral_inhibition&wprov=rarw1

  • Psythik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    23 days ago

    So which one is supposed to be the good one? Her body looks identical to me in all three photos.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      Really? To my eyes, the vertical stripes are unflattering, the horizontal stripes accentuate her figure in a good way, and the diagonal stripes make her look somewhat slimmer

      • Psythik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 days ago

        I see a perfect hourglass figure in all three pics, with just the right amount of curves.

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      23 days ago

      There’s this old propaganda that horizontal stripes make you look “fat,” e.g. bad, and vertical stripes have the opposite effect, thinning, e.g. good. This is harmful rhetoric, as it encourages women to overprioritize looking thin.

      It is true that the horizonal stripe dress accentuates the curves, whereas the vertical stripes diminish them. But the values ascribed to these features are ass-backward. Curvy is good! Love the horizontal stripes personally.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        22 days ago

        I don’t think anyone here is against the horizontal stripes. The vertical ones don’t make her look fat, they just totally obfuscate her figure and make her look shapeless

        • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 days ago

          It’s a classic old saying. Women of my generation grew up hearing it and being shamed for wearing horizontal stripes.

          No one is saying vertical makes people look fat. If anything, it makes then look frumpy, uncomfortable and awkward.

  • Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    22 days ago

    Despite being the same lovely woman, I am infinitely more attracted to her in the horizontal stripes.