The first one looks like a bottle, the second looks chubbier, and the third looks great.
Very effective demonstration, actually kind of impressive how successful it was.
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
814 points (95.7% liked)
memes
18424 readers
2715 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
She has different proportions in each picture. I can't tell if it was three different pictures, or they edited one picture and shaved down some spots depending on the dress.
Yes in the third picture which we all think she looks the best, there's more space between her arms and her body than there are in the other two pictures. They definitely shaved down something so she's thinner in the third picture.
Why the hell do horizontal stripes make you look thicker?
Because our brains are dumb
I have trouble estimating her position, direction and velocity.
I call shenanigans!
Gj. Thanks for demonstrating this picture is bs.
Not same pose. Look at the different size gaps between elbows and body.
When they said the same pose, they just mean they are front facing, arms to the side, as opposed to different positions for each dress. It's pretty darn close. She had to change dresses between shots, so the poses aren't going to be perfectly identical, but they are close enough to make the point that a person looks different depending on the stripes.
Do you really think that extra half inch of daylight between her arm and body somehow faked the result?
The way to do this would be to edit the dress in Photoshop or similar. One picture, three designs and the model is the same in each.
Computer model with dress (e.g. Unreal Metahuman). Change the material but dimensions stay exactly equal.
Agreed
Nope, I wouldn't fully believe it. Actual photos are much more convincing.
I don't trust any photo manipulation for any reason. I understand that it is often necessary for economic, artistic, or graphic design efficiency, but for things I have to trust, I want real photos.
Absolutely. When the post is about how things look different based on the patterns chosen, everything we're looking at has to be the same or we can't really compare.
This isn't a peer-reviewed drug study, it's just a demonstration. Things don't have to be absolutely perfect to demonstrate the basic concept that the orientation of the stripes makes a difference in perception.
If she was facing front on one pose, sideways for another, and facing backwards for another, I'd agree with you. But three front facing photos, in the same pose, shot from the same distance in the same light, is good enough to demonstrate the difference effectively. I would much rather have this display, over a faked display of the same photo, with the dress patterns applied with AI or something. Then I would doubt the result. But doing it this way convinces me.
If you are demonstrating an optical illusion then the width of the subject must be measurable equal.
I'm sold on the third one being best. Good enough for the Internet.
Also the i think the different collars matters. Low No collar, high black collar, high no collar.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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
I'm genuinely surprised so many people are familiar with this.
It's the Internet. By now, a lot of people have seen photos of those striped WWII ships.
How useful would this stuff be at disguising yourself from surveillance?
Maybe if the stripes were across your face, nobody would notice you. I think the diagonal stripes would make your face look less fat.
It's not about not getting noticed. The idea would be to keep them from analyzing footage of you to determine your identity.
What exactly are the cameras scanning for? Is it just measurements between specific points? It would probably work pretty well for that.
Yes for the face they measure your iris and sclera and the distance between your eyes. They compute a ratio output and use that. If your nose and mouth are visible they also create ratios for those. Distance and hight x length . By modifying these points, the ratios are poisoned.
For movement gait identification. They use stride and leg lengths. (Thighs and calf ratios). Speed. Overall height. And where legs start (,hip). They make ratio measurements. But that's not as useful as it is for face. Not as accurate because of clothing.
They use something more like motion capture. You ever seen videos of people in black skin suits with ping pong balls glued to it. ? They use this in games and cgi. They track movement with the ping pong balls and then map it on a computer to the CGI model.
This is what is basically used for gait. tracking.
But. Maybe you are thinking. "Holdon. If they need to use the ping pong balls in studios to capture motion, how can they do it from a video of someone walking down the street?"
Well. Firstly it's not nearly as good as the suit/ball method done in a studio.
But it doesn't have to be to create a high enough resolution of the movements to create a signature .
That said. Unlike facial recognition, it's current ability to identify someone is less accurate and they can't just run it through a big database. Instead they use other information like cell phone pings to first create a list of possible identities.
As you can guess. That still means there is huge amounts of error.
There are huge amounts of error in facial recognition too. They just downplay it.
But it's not nearly as good as they want you and juries/judges to think.
Anywho. This is why the dazzle camouflage is specifically useful for gait recognition poisoning.
The multiple high contrast bars of black and white confuse the software . The software cannot find the actual outline of the person vs the background. Especially in a video from afar. It poisons the data.
Even modern day equipment has low accuracy determining the distance and specific location of things with this camouflage.
So the movement gait tracking would likely be impacted by this. Almost certainly. Since it heavily relies on leg movements and stride distance, even wearing a pair of dazzle pants with a regular shirt could, in theory, do a decent job.
But not sure if there is any research on it. I'll have to look into this.
As for painting the face in this pattern. It's less likely to work. Because facial recognition looks for specific feature ratios and ignores the rest. (However wearing a mesh scarf covering the face (no eye holes,) with the pattern, would be successful). But any mesh pattern would do this.
Those geometric artistic face makeup guides you see are worthless. There is actual research on that.
They don't work.
But what does work is altering the ratios of your eyes. Because that's what facial recognition software mostly uses.
-
Wear sunglasses that also block infrared. Easiest.
-
Wear colored contact lenses that expand the size of your iris. Quite a lot do. Especially costume ones. Average iris is around 9-11mm. Costume colored lenses range from 13-15mm. You can even get some that completely cover the whites of the eyes. Tho I hear they are uncomfortable.
-
Use makeup tricks to make your eyes look longer or taller. There are anime makeup tutorials that do just that.
-
Add age lines. Research shows that older faces and faces with age lines added with paint/makeup , really screw up recognition.
-
Be black. Recognition software has a lot of false matches for African Americans. Especially African American women.
We had a bank robbery on my town a while back, a guy with a hoodie, so it was tough to get a good look at his face.
They finally figured out that he was wearing a new type of mask made out of black stretchy material, with a face screen printed on the front of it, mostly celebrities. When put on, and disguised with a hoodie, it seems like it could fool facial rec pretty easily.
Banks be wondering how they keep getting robbed by Kobe Bryant. It would be a good thing to wear to a potentially violent rally.
Also I just had an idea. Jncos. Y'all remember those big ass wide pants?
I bet it's pretty difficult for accurate gait measurements to be taken from pants that swim around you.
Be like wearing a big fluffy skirt.
We could bring back jncos!
Think of the pocket space! Don't you miss being able to carry a small laptop in your back pocket? I do.
Add a dazzle pattern on them and you are basically invisible.
Yeah I've seen those and they certainly would.
Get yourself a Elon Musk one to wear for any mayhem activities.
Pdiddy
Epstein
Ghislaine Maxwell
Love to get one of kkkaroline
Pam bondi
Steve Miller.
Mike johnson.
Have your pick
Kinda like how the Boston tea party did by dressing up as natives except without the racism.
It's not a bad tactic.
And only now I get it. TIL, thanks!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Despite being the same lovely woman, I am infinitely more attracted to her in the horizontal stripes.
Hips looks wide.
The vertical is the worst of them.
Just wondering, are you a PoC?
view more: next ›