Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Best Optical Illusion of the Year Contest

Posted by samzenpus on from the stare-at-the-center dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The 7th annual 'Best illusion of the year contest' was held by the Neural Correlate Society last week in Florida, and it featured 10 fantastic visual illusions selected from a pool of over 150 submissions. The site has demos of the illusions that made the finals, with brief explanations about what each illusion tells us about the visual system. Some might be important for the design of video displays and animations."

79 comments

  1. And the winner is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The imaginary webpage!

    1. Re:And the winner is... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      It's this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjMVsTFVX10

      I don't think we can slashdot youtube :).

      Anyway, I find if I shift some attention to the dots while looking at the centre dot, even though the whole thing rotates I can still notice that the dots are changing colour.

      It is normally more important for the brain to notice that the "whole thing is rotating together" than the dots changing colour. The big picture is more important.

      That said, I'm not so sure about how the "loch ness aftereffect " one works (3rd place): http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/05/best-illusions-turning-wheel-seems-to-jump-backwards.html

      I don't have flash player 9 so I'm linking to the one that works for me :).

      Maybe the sudden change that is untrackable causes the brain to guess that the rotation is the other way.

      I find this illusion interesting (not a winner for this year): http://www.psy.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/illnews7e.html

      Because some older people can't see the illusory motion effect!

      --
  2. Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's no fucking way I'm installing that fucking Apple shit on my PC, no matter how cool the optical illusions are.

    1. Re:Quicktime? by dintech · · Score: 2

      Agreed, Quicktime player has to be one of the worst things ever, irrespective of the codec.

    2. Re:Quicktime? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yea man. I am sticking to Adobe flash.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Quicktime? by bondsbw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Very true for Windows. On a Mac it works fine.

      Not that that is at all surprising... but I am a little surprised Apple doesn't make its Windows version better, seeing as Quicktime is the only computer-related Apple product many people come in contact with. It made me think poorly of them for years, until I actually used a Mac and found it to be better.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's at least 100 times better, which says a lot about Quicktime.

    5. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple shit

      Do you mean 'Ape shit'?

    6. Re:Quicktime? by The+Moof · · Score: 1

      sticking to Adobe flash

      That <video> tag isn't becoming standardized and widely supported fast enough...

    7. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that would explain Steve Jobs' surname...

    8. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, I mean most people have never heard of iTunes, iPads, iPods or iPhones, but Quicktime? Yea, everyone knows Quicktime....

    9. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's awful on Macs too. Before I discovered VLC for Mac, watching movies was the one job my old Dell laptop held on to as Quicktime is just so hopelessly bad.

    10. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh, why do they need to try and take over your computer when they already have it?

      Back the the subject though, I love science!

    11. Re:Quicktime? by smelch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      iPads, iPods and iPhones are not computer related, they're consumer electronics. iTunes is crummy software, Quicktime is crummy software. If you don't have an Apple COMPUTER you would think Apple only writes crummy software. If they write crummy software, why would you use their OS? It's probably crummy.

      Not that I believe that, but to a layperson it might appear that way.

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
    12. Re:Quicktime? by ifrag · · Score: 1

      Miro actually works pretty well also. I don't really care for all the other stuff baked into it (uTorrent finally has a Mac port), but as a media player it's smooth.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    13. Re:Quicktime? by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Yeah but let's be fair, who the heck uses Windows anyway? /he types, from Windows

    14. Re:Quicktime? by repetty · · Score: 1

      Flash? 100 time better? On what planet?

    15. Re:Quicktime? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the one when you're comparing Flash on Windows to Quicktime on Windows. If you're making the comparison on OSX it goes the other way. However, Quicktime literally runs on nothing but Windows and MacOS, so Flash wins big in lots of other places, too since Quicktime doesn't bother to show up. If you want to reach the absolute maximum number of device you use Flash. On Windows it uses acceleration well and on Linux with nVidia we also get acceleration that brings flash into the realm of reason. As a user of contemporary hardware there is no other reasonable choice for Linux unless you don't want to use your GPU for anything.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Than QuickTime? All of them.

    17. Re:Quicktime? by Goaway · · Score: 1

      I've never found fault with Quicktime on OS X for watching anything, at least as long as Perian is installed.

      VLC, on the other hand, is horrid.

    18. Re:Quicktime? by Idbar · · Score: 1

      At least flash is multi-platform consistent. It performs poorly everywhere, but it's something I expect. Quicktime and iTunes seem to particularly suck real bad in Windows

    19. Re:Quicktime? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      In my experience most users don't even realise that there is an alternative. iTunes is just what you use to manage your iOS device, the same as most phones come with their own crapware even when you can just copy files via Explorer. Same with printers, people just assume you have to install the stupid monitor program and assorted shovelware on the disc to make it work.

      Most people are pretty much at the mercy of software developers.

      Similarly back when I worked in the field a few years back a lot of people had trouble understanding why their PCs got slower over time. A lot of them seem to have hear that it is because they had too much "stuff" on it, but assumed that referred to the amount of music or number of photos they stored. They would try moving things onto USB memory sticks or deleting old icons off the desktop. They almost never blamed Apple for the poor quality of iTunes, assuming it was something they did or that Microsoft/Dell/HP/Advent were responsible.

      When people see "one click instant photo printing" on the box the ramifications of that, i.e. the always-running program it requires, don't even enter their minds.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. I've got one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    University degrees!

  4. Already slashdotted! :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This URL has already been slashdotted! If you know of a mirror please post link :-)

  5. Last Year's Winner by nharmon · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAXm0dIuyug

    1. Re:Last Year's Winner by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      I was genuinely surprised to not see Rick Astley. Oh how cynical you've made me, Internet.

      --
      Track your TV Shows with your iPhone - FREE
    2. Re:Last Year's Winner by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Oh no you don't. You're trying to trick me into thinking it's not Rick Astley so I will click on it.

      Ha.

      here is a better link:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Last Year's Winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was expecting goatse.

    4. Re:Last Year's Winner by nharmon · · Score: 1

      Ha! Rickroll interrupted by Youtube advertisement.

    5. Re:Last Year's Winner by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Wow. That's pretty awesome, and after getting this year's page to load and seeing how crappy the entries are it's very awesome--only the first 2 of this year's entries were even mildly interesting, while last year's winner is fantastic.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  6. Illusion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This site creates good illusion of being slashdoted, oh wait...

  7. Speaking of images nobody'll believe... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yesterday I ran across a visual I had to blink a few times to comprehend... Linky...

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    1. Re:Speaking of images nobody'll believe... by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

      Oh why, oh why did I blow all my mod points on the caffiene microbe article?!?

      Thank you Slashdot for finally fixing the feeds and the sidebox alignment. It was getting really annoying! Now, if I could only convince work to punt IE...

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    2. Re:Speaking of images nobody'll believe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wow, me too - I dismissed "Duken Nukem Forever Goes Gold" as "Duke Nukem Forever delayed another year" without even looking at it. I genuinely thought they were being sarcastic.

  8. You only THOUGHT ... by TheCrig · · Score: 1

    ... they were in Florida.

    --
    -- Jim Crigler In 1937, I began, like Lazarus, the impossible return. -- Whittaker Chambers
  9. Sony's Entry? by AwooOOoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did Sony's firewall's make the cut for best optical illusion?

    1. Re:Sony's Entry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This contest was for "illusions" not "delusions"

  10. Site down by wedgiesaurus · · Score: 0

    Site down, and the google cached one doesn't want to load. Anyone got a mirror link?

  11. Slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is so.

    1. Re:Slashdotted by oscarwumpus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Perhaps here: http://www.newscientist.com/special/best-new-illusions-2011

    2. Re:Slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mirrors anyone?

      Here is a mirror.

  12. What's the illusion here? by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1
    http://gif.neuralcorrelate.com/finalists_2011/Masashi/fishbone.png

    I see a fish carcass being sodomized. Am I missing it?

    1. Re:What's the illusion here? by phatphoton · · Score: 2

      http://lsc.univ-evry.fr/~eurohaptics/upload/cd/papers/f46.pdf - explains it fairly well

    2. Re:What's the illusion here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see a fish carcass being sodomized. Am I missing it?

      When you look at the picture, do you not feel a downward pressure on your dick head?

      (you did say sodomized)

  13. Slashdot Insurance by phatphoton · · Score: 2

    Amazon/other cloud vendors would make a killing selling "Slashdot Protection" like insurance for bandwidth. If your site gets slashdotted, you're guaranteed a certain period of time of increased bandwidth for a nominal monthly fee.

    1. Re:Slashdot Insurance by WhitePanther5000 · · Score: 1

      You can already sorta do this with rackspace, among others. The problem is... how many bloggers, etc expect to get slashdotted enough to justify the cost?

    2. Re:Slashdot Insurance by geekoid · · Score: 1

      They do, but it's not called slashdot protection.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Slashdot Insurance by mclearn · · Score: 1

      You can already do this with Amazon's Elastic Beanstalk. Yes, it costs. So would insurance.

    4. Re:Slashdot Insurance by ais523 · · Score: 1

      NearlyFreeSpeech apparently, when a site gets Slashdotted, charges them for the extra bandwidth at the time, but gives them a permanent discount thereafter. (It's a side-effect of their pricing structure, but an apparently deliberate one, presumably to persuade people to keep paying through the Slashdotting, as it's pre-paid.) That seems vaguely similar to what you're suggesting.

      --
      (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
    5. Re:Slashdot Insurance by timepilot · · Score: 1

      Is that intercal in a sig?
      That's awesome. Shouldn't it end with PLEASE GIVE UP?

    6. Re:Slashdot Insurance by ais523 · · Score: 2

      It's a one-liner (the shortest known algorithm to write an addition without using the standard library), not a complete program; it does nothing by itself. (I had to golf it right down to fit it in Slashdot's sig limits). It's not really recommended to do it quite like that in production code, as it uses a rather significant line number (1), and leaks all over your operand overloads without scoping them properly. It works in C-INTERCAL, and I think probably CLC-INTERCAL too, although it makes use of some relatively new additions to the language.

      // C-INTERCAL comaintainer; see http://c.intercal.org.uk/ for a list of relevant C-INTERCAL links

      --
      (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
    7. Re:Slashdot Insurance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *silence, crickets chirping*

  14. slashdotted by Thornburg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Apparently you need a 'mirror' to view these optical illusions...

  15. Slashdotted by bruno.fatia · · Score: 1

    Mirrors anyone?

  16. A great example by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    of how the mind will make leaps and conclusion with minimal input.
    Optical illusions are a great opportunity to teach people how to think rational about something that on initial view doesn't make sense or breaks reality.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:A great example by Locutus · · Score: 1

      are you talking about Windows Phone 7 and its marketing? lol

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  17. Slashdot by PPH · · Score: 1

    Making old news look new again.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  18. a black car followed by a white car by wrench+turner · · Score: 1

    TFA: The Exchange of Features, Textures and Faces - The binding problem is a fundamental issue in neuroscience. The term refers to the fact that the brain processes color, motion, and other visual features separately and in parallel, yet our perception is of a unified world, populated by coherent objects.

    I've long marvelled that as I'm speeding down the freeway, a black car followed by a white car in the oncoming lane looks like a police car: a black car with a white door.

  19. It would be nice to have animated .GIFs instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd rather see these as animated .GIFs instead of Flash. sigh... oh well...
    (yes, the 1990s called, they want their animation back...ha ha)

  20. My investment account statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

    1. Re:My investment account statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      INDEX

  21. The article's an entry in itself by Candid88 · · Score: 1

    Wow, that's some optical illusion. It looks like an article on optical illusions when in fact if you look really closely, it's a 502 page.

    1. Re:The article's an entry in itself by cdpage · · Score: 1

      yet another slashdot victim

  22. Mirror by antdude · · Score: 1

    http://www.networkmirror.com/hYdw3qNZFFrB_AoK/illusioncontest.neuralcorrelate.com/cat/top-10-finalists/2011/index.html

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  23. Mirror for Third Place Winner by IceFoot · · Score: 1

    Third Place Winner is called the "Loch Ness Aftereffect"

    Available on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djd218oWOGQ

    Higher quality version at http://lpp.psycho.univ-paris5.fr/wexlerillusion/

  24. TSA should win... by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

    ... for the illusion of security.

  25. Mirror for First Place Winner by IceFoot · · Score: 1

    The first place winner is called "Silencing Awareness of Change by Background Motion" and is the blinking-dots-in-a-circle illusion.

    Several versions here: http://visionlab.harvard.edu/silencing/

  26. Mirror for Second Place Winner by IceFoot · · Score: 1

    The second place winner is called "Grouping by Contrast"

    Mirror here: http://www.moillusions.com/2011/05/grouping-by-contrast.html

  27. Best 500 internal error illusion ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I swear I can smell the smoke from their server when I get the internal error due to be slashdotted.
     

  28. Look at the left hand.... by Beer_Smurf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Best Optical Illusion of the Year is going on right now
    Tornados and Obama meeting with the queen hides discussion of the Patriot Act from the media.

    1. Re:Look at the left hand.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tornados and Obama meeting with the queen hides discussion of the Patriot Act from the media.

      Why are tornadoes meeting with the Queen?

  29. FYI all by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    It's one of the more hideous webpages I've seen since Angelfire died.
    The illusions are all linked, and then the videos ARE LOWER ON THE SAME PAGE.

    So when you load the page, and wait....and wait....and wait....it's loading a bunch of quicktime (ugh) videos below in large preview screens. be patient, it will eventually come up.

    Wow, failsite.

    --
    -Styopa
  30. Bad captions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The explanations on some of the illusions are terrible. There were at least three that I skipped because I couldn't tell what I was supposed to be seeing...

  31. Flash doesn't work for the features/textures one by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

    For entry number 8, http://illusionoftheyear.com/2011/the-exchange-of-features-textures-and-faces/ , the Flash thing doesn't display properly. It says to "move the slider" but there is no slider (just a 255 that you can't alter), and there are no "Harry and Dobby" in Demo 1. The others all work fine. Tried in Firefox and IE latest versions. Have latest Flash (10.3).

  32. Even the background image is an optical illusion by mmj638 · · Score: 1

    I love the background image up the sides of that site - that look like domino pieces of something.

    Even that is a pretty cool optical illusion!

  33. Illusions fail by billcopc · · Score: 1

    There's a lot of fail in that series of "illusions". I'm particularly annoyed with #5, the "Mask of Love". Yeah, it's amazing how three people discovered that a blurry, low-res image is ambiguous and might look like some other blurry, low-res image. Welcome to 2400 baud pr0n, dumbasses!

    I suppose, when one's career consists of selling optical illusions , after a while you start scraping the bottom of the barrel...

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  34. Hehe, cool by atomicbutterfly · · Score: 1

    It was fun to look at all these illusions.

    It was not fun to read half the comments complain about Quicktime/Flash, whereas a thread regarding the illusions anywhere else would have focused on, I dunno, discussion about the ILLUSIONS.

  35. legos=no go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the lego one sucks balls unless you're looking at the first two examples which don't use legos. when they use the legos it sucks ass.