Clockwise. All five of them.

timebecomesaloop.jpg

IgG4: Wierd, they didn't seem to be rotating at all, just twisting back and forth. Also at 720p I'm pretty sure I can see nip in those silhouettes.

This

/especially the nips part

huh? ummm... I really need to try start submittin links again

I had to focus to make them appear to spin. They noticeably stop for a beat before continuing to move. That brief stop makes it appear to oscillate instead of spin. It's not fluid enough to appear to be spinning. The other version of this, the dancer, is fluid enough.

/oblig

IgG4: Wierd, they didn't seem to be rotating at all, just twisting back and forth. Also at 720p I'm pretty sure I can see nip in those silhouettes.

I think they embedded some full loops in there as well. Faux illusion (is that redundent?) is what this is.

First I saw all of them going clockwise. Then I focused on one, and imagined a face going counterclockwise and I was able to make it go counterclockwise. Peripherally, I saw them all change to counterclockwise. But I couldn't get them to do 180 back-and-forth turns.

Freaky.

Aquapope: First I saw all of them going clockwise. Then I focused on one, and imagined a face going counterclockwise and I was able to make it go counterclockwise. Peripherally, I saw them all change to counterclockwise. But I couldn't get them to do 180 back-and-forth turns.

Freaky.

To change their direction I focused on the boobs. But I'm a guy so that goes without saying.

CtrlAltDestroy: To change their direction I focused on the boobs. But I'm a guy so that goes without saying.

UM! HEY! But. but _{I'm...a guy...}

Confabulat: and,if you think they "noticeably stop for a beat" cover up three of them and figure out when that happens. ha farkers thinking they're too clever when they get fully suckered by their own minds

Tried that already. The video does still stutter, but the internet su... [BUFFERING] ...cks here.

Confabulat: and,if you think they "noticeably stop for a beat" cover up three of them and figure out when that happens. ha farkers thinking they're too clever when they get fully suckered by their own minds

Let's see. Either everyone else is wrong or you're wrong. Which one do the odds favor?

The animations do stop for a brief moment. 2/4 are just the same animation, but mirrored. If I gave enough of a damn about proving someone as abrasive as you wrong it would be easy to do. Just download the video and step it forward frame by frame and see the point where there is a lack of movement.

FTA:
"What changes when you view the women in pairs or individually?"

The size of my pants?

/in my bunk

The do appear to just be twisting back and forth. I could let my mind wander for a moment (NIPS!) and have them rotate in any direction I please, but they still look like they are just twisting. Neat enough, I suppose.

ryant123: CtrlAltDestroy: Confabulat: and,if you think they "noticeably stop for a beat" cover up three of them and figure out when that happens. ha farkers thinking they're too clever when they get fully suckered by their own minds

Let's see. Either everyone else is wrong or you're wrong. Which one do the odds favor?

The animations do stop for a brief moment. 2/4 are just the same anoimation, but mirrored. If I gave enough of a damn about proving someone as abrasive as you wrong it would be easy to do. Just download the video and step it forward frame by frame and see the point where there is a lack of movement.

You're right, you should download the video and advance it frame by frame. And then come back and tell us how there must be a bug in your video software.

It's cute when they get mouthy and indignant. D'awwww.

Headline is more extreme. Except for those years of Engrish.

I still can't see the farking sailboat.

counterclockwise. My eyes cannot take that much in at once so I started by looking at the feet, easy to see if after that.

If the nipples where more noticeable, it would be easier to tell which way they are spinning.

I thought it was weird when they started talking. Anyone else freaked out by that?

Is this the same optical illusion that always made me think Crow was looking at the camera rather than the screen?

1 and 3 were spinning clockwise, while 2 and 4 were counterclockwise for me. I couldn't make them reverse. With the dancer (thanks friedlinx) I have to see her in my peripheral vision to make her reverse.

Also, the Einstein mask doesn't work for me either, but there is another one out there that does.

I wonder if that has something to do with having bad vision... I wear contacts and am almost legally blind... anyone know if that has an effect on these illusion?

DragonDeadite: 1 and 3 were spinning clockwise, while 2 and 4 were counterclockwise for me. I couldn't make them reverse. With the dancer (thanks friedlinx) I have to see her in my peripheral vision to make her reverse.

Also, the Einstein mask doesn't work for me either, but there is another one out there that does.

I wonder if that has something to do with having bad vision... I wear contacts and am almost legally blind... anyone know if that has an effect on these illusion?

_{It may, I don't know. But I do know I like to mess with you.}

I'm on the 'it paused for a brief second every 180^o' wagon. But Confabulat says I'm wrong, so I must be.

ajt167: DragonDeadite: 1 and 3 were spinning clockwise, while 2 and 4 were counterclockwise for me. I couldn't make them reverse. With the dancer (thanks friedlinx) I have to see her in my peripheral vision to make her reverse.

Also, the Einstein mask doesn't work for me either, but there is another one out there that does.

I wonder if that has something to do with having bad vision... I wear contacts and am almost legally blind... anyone know if that has an effect on these illusion?

It may, I don't know. But I do know I like to mess with you.

That's just not right....

but funny!

For those you don't want to deal with Gawker shiatiness:

Link to video (new window)

DragonDeadite: 1 and 3 were spinning clockwise, while 2 and 4 were counterclockwise for me. I couldn't make them reverse. With the dancer (thanks friedlinx) I have to see her in my peripheral vision to make her reverse.

Also, the Einstein mask doesn't work for me either, but there is another one out there that does.

I wonder if that has something to do with having bad vision... I wear contacts and am almost legally blind... anyone know if that has an effect on these illusion?

Yep.

theorellior:

This is not so much an optical illusion as lack of data forcing ambiguous outcomes. This is an optical illusion, in that it's based on tricking the basic mechanisms of sight and perception:

[www.maniacworld.com image 467x467]

Ok, that is far more awesome than the article one. The missing circle is green I tell you!

CtrlAltDestroy: Confabulat: and,if you think they "noticeably stop for a beat" cover up three of them and figure out when that happens. ha farkers thinking they're too clever when they get fully suckered by their own minds

Let's see. Either everyone else is wrong or you're wrong. Which one do the odds favor?

The animations do stop for a brief moment. 2/4 are just the same animation, but mirrored. If I gave enough of a damn about proving someone as abrasive as you wrong it would be easy to do. Just download the video and step it forward frame by frame and see the point where there is a lack of movement.

Will you come back and apologize when you realize you're wrong?

Zafler: theorellior:

This is not so much an optical illusion as lack of data forcing ambiguous outcomes. This is an optical illusion, in that it's based on tricking the basic mechanisms of sight and perception:

[www.maniacworld.com image 467x467]

Ok, that is far more awesome than the article one. The missing circle is green I tell you!

Moreso, if I stare at it long enough, the purple dots fade away and I see nothing but the green dot spinning.

Who keeps saying my name?

fap fap fap paf fap paf paf paf fap paf

TulsaRobert: Zafler: theorellior:

This is not so much an optical illusion as lack of data forcing ambiguous outcomes. This is an optical illusion, in that it's based on tricking the basic mechanisms of sight and perception:

[www.maniacworld.com image 467x467]

Ok, that is far more awesome than the article one. The missing circle is green I tell you!

Moreso, if I stare at it long enough, the purple dots fade away and I see nothing but the green dot spinning.

Oh, wow, I had not noticed that. Freaky.

ex0du5: At first I thought the optical illusion was when that the missing dot looked green when I was staring at the cross.

That's the thing, it is part of it. If you follow the missing dot with your eyes it's white. It only looks green on the periphery.

Zafler: ex0du5: At first I thought the optical illusion was when that the missing dot looked green when I was staring at the cross.

That's the thing, it is part of it. If you follow the missing dot with your eyes it's white. It only looks green on the periphery.

I've always loved that illusion. With just a single animation, they've created 3 or 4 simultaneous illusions.

I could not make them do anything. They moved whatever way they (or my brain) wanted to. Also, whatever one I looked at always spun (or oscillated) the same way no matter how I tried to change her. however, the other 3 were seemingly free to change direction or switch between oscillating and spinning. If I changed my focus, that one became the one that was fixed and the one I just looked at was free to change.

Pretty cool, though I've seen enough of these to not be weirded out.

/ Why are these spinning people illusions always naked women?
// Not complaining. Just curious.

DragonDeadite: 1 and 3 were spinning clockwise, while 2 and 4 were counterclockwise for me. I couldn't make them reverse. With the dancer (thanks friedlinx) I have to see her in my peripheral vision to make her reverse.

Try just looking at her feet.

theorellior: www.maniacworld.com

I raise you.

CtrlAltDestroy: Confabulat: and,if you think they "noticeably stop for a beat" cover up three of them and figure out when that happens. ha farkers thinking they're too clever when they get fully suckered by their own minds

Let's see. Either everyone else is wrong or you're wrong. Which one do the odds favor?

The animations do stop for a brief moment. 2/4 are just the same animation, but mirrored. If I gave enough of a damn about proving someone as abrasive as you wrong it would be easy to do. Just download the video and step it forward frame by frame and see the point where there is a lack of movement.

A few points.

1. The video is very long, and comprised of 4 figures, because of the layout and human vagaries, they cannot all be watched at the same time, ergo, some people will miss the following items through sheer chance.
2. At some points, the video is "missing" frame, as you suggest, that end up giving more of a pivot effect. Fluidity is lost.
3. Each of the 4 figures is not a copy of the others just mirrored, any combination of which may have missed that "frame", but seldom do they all have the issue at the same time. This lends itself to a sense of confusion.
4. As someone else noted, you'll notice more detail on the one that you are currently watching.

To the people who still don't see fault in the video:
That being said, there is one thing in particular that one can watch. Ideally, you would watch the clip 4 times, each time focusing solely on the figures hands. due to the intricacy of detail of the hands and palm a missing frame is clear as day(especially if you scale up definition to 720 and watch maximized). Each respective figure will have it's own pattern that it follows.

Now, is this intentional? Probably not, at least at first.. Each of the 4 figures is on a looped animation, but not just one rotation, probably two at least(I really didn't watch enough to count frequency and look for the alternating pattern. For example(see previous) Each figure is on a "loop" of 4 rotations, and in the third, there is a missing frame, in addition to each figure starting at a different rotation within that "loop".

And now that "at first" part. Many of us have seen that dancer gif, and this was plainly copying it, but done with what I think is an error, what better way to cover up an error than hiding it? That's why we've got 4 dancers not necessarily in sync with eachother.

One figure would have worked just fine had the animation not been screwed up. The tendency for the eye to wander, made this whole work a study in how human's process what they see, and how they observe.

The project is also done in an uncommon perspective, in that distance does not affect scale. I can't remember the term, but think of a blueprint layout. In that this is not a natural perspective to the viewer, it's an illusion all in it's own right. In fact, hat's the only illusion here, in that you don't think of a human figure rendered in that form, you're filling in depth where there is none(literally).

The hands being the same size are the giveaway, and what make it possible for the viewer to imagine rotation in either direction. ALL signs of depth have been tweaked or otherwise removed.

/yeah, I'm too lazy to look it up, but not too lazy to type
//many 3d programs allow one to render in this mode, and the guy probably left out a keyframe in the animation somewhere along the line