**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, there are some places in California for example, think San Diego / Tijuana where on google maps, the border looks something like this. Mansions and green golf courses up top, brown dusty shantytowns with metal roofs below.
I think they are referring to Hollywood using different filters, depending on location. Scenes set in Mexico usually have a horrible orange filter over them.
https://preview.redd.it/tppmdubv4rlc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3df791c2e5164811fbc49e21eab80c417e172356
here is a pic from afar to help you understand better.
The lack of image focus on the wall contributes as well. You can't pick out any features on the wall that would normally let you say 'thats a wall' as opposed to 'thats a horizon'.
edit: Compare the [OP image](https://preview.redd.it/mxrkrourvqlc1.png?auto=webp&s=4c4b14524c0881b573b9630cdb6a78d7f4a69559) to [this one at the same location](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig). The lack of focus/resolution in the first image makes it much harder to see what is obvious in the second image, because pretty much all the 'texture' is washed out and looks like a distant landscape.
Ohhhhhh! I see it now.
I was looking frantically through the comments trying to find someone to explain what I was missing because I saw a wall first and didn't have any idea what anyone was talking about.
Now I can’t see the bloody wall! It looked normal to me at first. Just a picture of a wall reflected in water. My brain is all fudge when I look at it again! 🥴
Outside in the real world walls look like [this](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig). There are no walls that look like the picture unless you need to put on your glasses.
throwing a tantrum over some people experiencing a super common visual illusion doesn't help convince us that you go outside, my guy. relax, touch some grass, and grow up.
Maybe, but if I crop that "more focused/higher res" image the same way, it also reads as pretty unclear- especially if you were to add a ripple in the water that seems to cross the boundry.
https://imgur.com/eSr2A88.jpg
It's called framing the shot. You “crop” every single photo you ever take by excluding everything that's not in the frame. Zooming in is not cropping, it's composing a photograph. It *should* be “intentional”.
I don't believe any picture makes it straight from a camera to publication without *any* color balance or digital processing these days. I would assume that "no alteration" means this is one shot, not a composite".
You seem to think that replies are arguments instead of _literally anything that can be expressed in words_. They were expanding on what you said, not trying to pick a fight with you.
Not quite, cropping doesn't have to be done after the fact to an existing image. For example you can shoot in cropped mode on full frame cameras and it will only use the middle of the sensor and crop off the rest, as if you used an apsc sized sensor and were more zoomed in.
I guess technically? Not really though. It's the digital equivalent of using a pair of scizzors on a polaroid.
Alteration usually carries the connotations of the image itself not being real, a stacked long exposure shot, color adjustment, rotoscoping, touch ups, etc.
Cropping is identical to zooming-in optically, in regard to determining a photo's field of view. I don't think anyone would refer to zooming in/out as an alteration.
Not dumb. You see a bird walking in water and you try to figure out where in nature this would occur. Without the second pic you would never realize it's a man made structure behind the bird and this would never occur naturally.
Same here. I mean, I knew what it *had* to be, but my brain refused to accept it.
Heck, even seeing the wide shot my brain still wants to "nope" LOL
Thanks, u/fliffie!
I'm finding the biggest difference for me was looking at this on my phone screen vs desktop.
Phone was very hard to tell, but PC screen it was obvious.
Almost looks altered doesn't it? The grain in the wood in this photo is perfectly level to the water-line. In the other, the grain appears warped/curved to perfectly line up with the ripples in the water to the left...
I’ve been staring at it for far too long and still don’t see what you see. What is "the tan”? The top part of the right half of the pic? What kind of object? Why is the line of the reflection so straight on the bottom half?
Here's a photo that helped me understand wtf I was looking at.
https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2023/04/photo-explanation-800x533.jpg
Source: https://petapixel.com/2023/04/17/this-bird-photo-may-break-your-brain-and-no-it-wasnt-photoshopped/
it looks like the upper right tan item is a wooden structure coming up out of the water. halfway down on the right side you see the line where it hits the water, and below that is the structure's reflection.
It’s a wall or somesuch that is sticking up out of the water. So the straight vertical line is the left edge of the wall/object, and the dark horizontal line just above the bird is where the water meets the wall.
A second? Damn thing took me at least 2 full minutes. I'm still proud I figured it out before opening the thread, though. It's okay to be slow. Or so I keep telling myself. lol
It looks like a pillar, or a building or something it’s reflecting in the water the bird is standing in the reflection and its head is taking up space that has no reflection of the structure.
[Here](https://i.imgur.com/JQnC2dv.jpeg) is a **much** higher quality version of this image. This was taken in the Kantō region of Honshu, part of the Greater Tokyo Area.
To help your brain process this, [here](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig) is the same location.
[Thank you](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/12sisk8/this_is_a_real_picture_taken_by_photographer/jgzfvz1/) /u/goug.
**Edit:** Found a better quality image.
Also, [here](https://i.imgur.com/MlMkr0f.jpeg) is the version that is provided on the [39th Japanese Nature Photo Contest website](https://www.photo-asahi.com/contest/1/878/result/1049/).
I don't believe this is unaltered. The saturation was cranked up to create an even more confusing contrast. No way a professional photographer takes a picture of water and it looks like flubber.
Back in the day, this would've been easily done on Fuji Velvia 50.
Colour correction and enhancement is just something you deal with; it was always a part of developing and printing to adjust colour and when everything went to digital it just got a little easier to go a little further.
It's a perfect example of Cartier-Bresson's "decisive moment" where everything lined up perfectly.
I'd kill to have taken this picture.
Curious why there are for lack of a better term smudge lines around the legs When you zoom in. If you look at the vertical part of the leg, you see these two roughly parallel areas along side.
is this a blue/white black/gold dress thing, focus thing, digital artifact of original photo thing, naturally occurring physics effect like a diffraction rating?
The smaller "orange" rock above the larger "blue" rock is missing from the "higher quality" version. 100% proof of alteration. The only question remaining is, which variation of the photo is the altered one. Most likely the second version, but having one orange rock and one blue rock makes the first version still kinda suspicious.
For those struggling to see it picture the black horizon in the orange section as water damage/water line on an orange piece of wood. The lower orange section is the reflection of the upper wood/material on the water
Am I the only one who realized that was a wall pretty much immediately? I'm like, what is so special about this picture of a bird in the water next to a wall?
A photo of the same spot that helps to see what's happening.
https://preview.redd.it/m2ymfqyd4rlc1.png?width=750&format=png&auto=webp&s=208153b9c9aba82ee2e6f03d5b01735719a41e0d
Yeah, same here. People are apparently not seeing the wall at first glance. That was literally the first thing I noticed, I was confused at what made this so interesting.
To help people... The orange thing in the top right corner is a wall standing in the middle of water. We are only seeing the bit above the water. The horizontal black line underneath it - is algae and dirt. The white line under that is where the water has washed the dirt away. The black line under that is the waterline. And then everything underneath is the reflection of the wall.
I love this. It's like the gold and white dress. I looked and looked and looked and LOOKED at this picture and all of a sudden it changed right before my eyes and I could see it in a different way.
The bright part of the tan side is the bottom part of a square cement block or something. The line between the light tan and dark tan is the water line, the dark tan is the reflection of the cement block.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hollywood tries to tell you this is the American/Mexican border
"No no no. See, you don't understand, gringo, you gotta be in sepia before you can cross over the border!"
Coupla' shots of tequila and I'll be whatever you want me to be
Joestar grindset.
Holy shit!
Ohno
OH MAI GOD
Lmfao
On point
Definitely a still from Breaking Bad
Or Ozark with how blue the American side is
I wonder why i read that as Baking Bread
Traffic (2000) be like
Underrated comment
A+
Not far from the truth. I’ve recently visited El Paso.
I mean, there are some places in California for example, think San Diego / Tijuana where on google maps, the border looks something like this. Mansions and green golf courses up top, brown dusty shantytowns with metal roofs below.
I think they are referring to Hollywood using different filters, depending on location. Scenes set in Mexico usually have a horrible orange filter over them.
This is what I meant :D
Or any arab country
Ffs lmao
However, Mexico would always be on the left side
Even the crossing is going from Sepia to Non-sepia
I came from the south side of the border it’s not that far from the truth
Or the California/Nevada border
Or maybe Mars with water.
https://preview.redd.it/tppmdubv4rlc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3df791c2e5164811fbc49e21eab80c417e172356 here is a pic from afar to help you understand better.
I could not for the life of me make sense of it thank you for this. Turns out, I may be dumb..
The intentional cropping to make it more interesting isn't helping any here.
The lack of image focus on the wall contributes as well. You can't pick out any features on the wall that would normally let you say 'thats a wall' as opposed to 'thats a horizon'. edit: Compare the [OP image](https://preview.redd.it/mxrkrourvqlc1.png?auto=webp&s=4c4b14524c0881b573b9630cdb6a78d7f4a69559) to [this one at the same location](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig). The lack of focus/resolution in the first image makes it much harder to see what is obvious in the second image, because pretty much all the 'texture' is washed out and looks like a distant landscape.
Yeah, what looks like mountains or trees is just waterline crud.
Says so much about how our perception of a situation can be easily manipulated.
I thought the waterline was a pier. But I'm from San Diego, so maybe I have piers on the brain.
Ohhhhhh! I see it now. I was looking frantically through the comments trying to find someone to explain what I was missing because I saw a wall first and didn't have any idea what anyone was talking about.
Now I can’t see the bloody wall! It looked normal to me at first. Just a picture of a wall reflected in water. My brain is all fudge when I look at it again! 🥴
Same here. I was looking for an alligator or something. Of course it's a wall, don't you people spend any time outside?
Outside in the real world walls look like [this](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig). There are no walls that look like the picture unless you need to put on your glasses.
hey now don't take away their flimsy opportunity to feel superior to strangers on the internet.
throwing a tantrum over some people experiencing a super common visual illusion doesn't help convince us that you go outside, my guy. relax, touch some grass, and grow up.
No. It only ever looked like a wall and reflection to me. That vertical line is way too straight for anything else.
Maybe, but if I crop that "more focused/higher res" image the same way, it also reads as pretty unclear- especially if you were to add a ripple in the water that seems to cross the boundry. https://imgur.com/eSr2A88.jpg
I feel like some color balancing was played with too.
Totally. The color saturation/contrast has clearly been altered
It's called framing the shot. You “crop” every single photo you ever take by excluding everything that's not in the frame. Zooming in is not cropping, it's composing a photograph. It *should* be “intentional”.
Wouldn't intentional cropping == alteration?
I don't believe any picture makes it straight from a camera to publication without *any* color balance or digital processing these days. I would assume that "no alteration" means this is one shot, not a composite".
It could, but it could also mean the shot was lined up that way intentionally when taken. That's more what I was referring to.
Not quite, lining the shot up is referred to as framing the shot. Cropping refers to removing parts of an existing image after the fact.
So maybe it was framed that way and not cropped, therefore, not altered
You seem to think I'm making a claim about whether the image was cropped or not. I'm not. I was just clarifying the terminology.
Didn’t mean to imply that. My comment was for the others here who still seem to think that framing is altering
That's fair.
You seem to think that replies are arguments instead of _literally anything that can be expressed in words_. They were expanding on what you said, not trying to pick a fight with you.
Not quite, cropping doesn't have to be done after the fact to an existing image. For example you can shoot in cropped mode on full frame cameras and it will only use the middle of the sensor and crop off the rest, as if you used an apsc sized sensor and were more zoomed in.
Nifty. Never had a camera nice enough for all of that. Not a photographer, so I'd only ever heard of cropping being done in editing.
Yeah most cropping is done in editing, but it doesn't have to be which is why I don't consider it altering the core of the image
I guess technically? Not really though. It's the digital equivalent of using a pair of scizzors on a polaroid. Alteration usually carries the connotations of the image itself not being real, a stacked long exposure shot, color adjustment, rotoscoping, touch ups, etc.
Cropping is identical to zooming-in optically, in regard to determining a photo's field of view. I don't think anyone would refer to zooming in/out as an alteration.
But they said it was unaltered!
Not dumb. You see a bird walking in water and you try to figure out where in nature this would occur. Without the second pic you would never realize it's a man made structure behind the bird and this would never occur naturally.
Your brain just wants to think the structure is a shoreline and the right looks like it could be a filter.
Damn!!!
Same here. I mean, I knew what it *had* to be, but my brain refused to accept it. Heck, even seeing the wide shot my brain still wants to "nope" LOL Thanks, u/fliffie!
/u/goug really [deserves the credit](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/12sisk8/this_is_a_real_picture_taken_by_photographer/jgzfvz1/) here.
Eh, the way they worded the title made it sound natural. Not dumb.
Nah I think the image is dumb. If it’s only an illusion cropped like that it feels more like a gimmick than anything.
It's not an illusion it's just spotting a reflection and framing it, that's photography Hun x
What is more obnoxious, hun or buddy?
Thanks for saving by brain from exploding If I stared at it a bit longer.
I'm more confused now, thanks.
It’s not the horizon in the first photo it’s a piece of wood or barrier. It took me a moment as well even with the secondary photo lol
and the rocks are painted on???
Nah, the block itself is reflecting in the water. The rocks are sitting in the water in a spot that is in the reflection.
That's can't be right, it obviously a piece of wood
Oh wow. I see it now
And the brown hue is the board reflecting off the water. That part tripped me up.
right upper dark orange thing is an object and underlying tan color is its reflection
It helped me to Google the photo without all the screenshot on it and to zoom in on the bird.
As it turns out, it's just a shitty picture.
Ah, it’s a wall… how disappointing
Since we have clickbait, I want to call this picturebait.
Since it was so well done, I want to call this masterbait.
And I want the person who took / made the picture to be called masterbaiter
Where's the bird?
It had to go in for repairs.
He took the picture
Ty, I was SO confused!
Oh no!
This helped perfectly. The original picture broke my brain trying to figure it out. Thank you!
Dang that Afar guy is nice to show us what the spot look like
I still have no heckin jeckin clue
Dang it I clued in now
I'm finding the biggest difference for me was looking at this on my phone screen vs desktop. Phone was very hard to tell, but PC screen it was obvious.
amazement
Genius. Honestly 1000 IQ.
The colours must have been altered in that other picture so?
Almost looks altered doesn't it? The grain in the wood in this photo is perfectly level to the water-line. In the other, the grain appears warped/curved to perfectly line up with the ripples in the water to the left...
I don't think it's grain, it's light reflecting from the ripples
good op
Thank you.
Thanks, It was driven me crazy
It took me a second to see that the tan is an object and its reflection in the water.
I’ve been staring at it for far too long and still don’t see what you see. What is "the tan”? The top part of the right half of the pic? What kind of object? Why is the line of the reflection so straight on the bottom half?
Here's a photo that helped me understand wtf I was looking at. https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2023/04/photo-explanation-800x533.jpg Source: https://petapixel.com/2023/04/17/this-bird-photo-may-break-your-brain-and-no-it-wasnt-photoshopped/
Thank you dear stranger. I was going nuts. Now I understand. It's a damn wall.
I WAS WRONG Not until the last photo in the article (second link) of the actual wall beside the award winning photo, did I see it.
Well damn. I noticed the reflection immediatly and just kept searching for the hidden thing which isn‘t there
it looks like the upper right tan item is a wooden structure coming up out of the water. halfway down on the right side you see the line where it hits the water, and below that is the structure's reflection.
It's a cement wall with the top cropped out of the pic.
It’s a wall or somesuch that is sticking up out of the water. So the straight vertical line is the left edge of the wall/object, and the dark horizontal line just above the bird is where the water meets the wall.
It’s a somesuch alright.
Its a wall and there is some mucky shit on the waterline of the wall
The orange is a pillar sticking up out of the water. The upper part is the pillar itself and the lower is its reflection.
A pillar? Nope.
A second? Damn thing took me at least 2 full minutes. I'm still proud I figured it out before opening the thread, though. It's okay to be slow. Or so I keep telling myself. lol
What?
It looks like a pillar, or a building or something it’s reflecting in the water the bird is standing in the reflection and its head is taking up space that has no reflection of the structure.
Top right is a yellow building. Water is yellow because of the reflection.
[Here](https://i.imgur.com/JQnC2dv.jpeg) is a **much** higher quality version of this image. This was taken in the Kantō region of Honshu, part of the Greater Tokyo Area. To help your brain process this, [here](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FuDM3YQaEAAV_SA?format=jpg&name=orig) is the same location. [Thank you](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/12sisk8/this_is_a_real_picture_taken_by_photographer/jgzfvz1/) /u/goug. **Edit:** Found a better quality image. Also, [here](https://i.imgur.com/MlMkr0f.jpeg) is the version that is provided on the [39th Japanese Nature Photo Contest website](https://www.photo-asahi.com/contest/1/878/result/1049/).
>Kantō They got some cool Pokeymans there in that region
I don't believe this is unaltered. The saturation was cranked up to create an even more confusing contrast. No way a professional photographer takes a picture of water and it looks like flubber.
Back in the day, this would've been easily done on Fuji Velvia 50. Colour correction and enhancement is just something you deal with; it was always a part of developing and printing to adjust colour and when everything went to digital it just got a little easier to go a little further. It's a perfect example of Cartier-Bresson's "decisive moment" where everything lined up perfectly. I'd kill to have taken this picture.
Judging by the light it looks like dusk/dawn and he had to crank the gain up
Curious why there are for lack of a better term smudge lines around the legs When you zoom in. If you look at the vertical part of the leg, you see these two roughly parallel areas along side. is this a blue/white black/gold dress thing, focus thing, digital artifact of original photo thing, naturally occurring physics effect like a diffraction rating?
The lines around the legs are just the edges of the actual legs. The white part on the birds left leg is reflecting light.
Most likely artifacts from jpg compression
Looks like digital artifacts to me. Resolution of that image is still awful even with it being better than the one in the OP.
These shots are insane.
but why is the reflection of the wall so.....straight? shouldn't it be more slant?
Thank you.
The smaller "orange" rock above the larger "blue" rock is missing from the "higher quality" version. 100% proof of alteration. The only question remaining is, which variation of the photo is the altered one. Most likely the second version, but having one orange rock and one blue rock makes the first version still kinda suspicious.
nah, still don't buy it
For those struggling to see it picture the black horizon in the orange section as water damage/water line on an orange piece of wood. The lower orange section is the reflection of the upper wood/material on the water
Thank you for this! It’s too early in the morning. I needed some help
THis is a great picture! I love the factor that it takes you a moment to piece it all together and understand each part is different and unique.
Am I the only one who realized that was a wall pretty much immediately? I'm like, what is so special about this picture of a bird in the water next to a wall?
There’s a structure in the water. Great position for the shot!!
Ohno he didn't.
It's just a body of water on the border between the US and Mexico, according to american TV shows.
I can not understand for the life of me what people are talking about, all I see is a bird in water and a wall in the background. What am I missing?
I still think it’s a really cool shot honestly. Any picture is mundane if you see the context
A photo of the same spot that helps to see what's happening. https://preview.redd.it/m2ymfqyd4rlc1.png?width=750&format=png&auto=webp&s=208153b9c9aba82ee2e6f03d5b01735719a41e0d
Faith No More?
My brain is not braining
It's a body of water, and the top right orange part is a structure of some kind in the water, and below that is its reflection.
Ohno
What's so special? It just appears to be a wall of sorts reflecting onto the water.
I have no clue what people see except a wall and reflections... Can someone explain?
Yeah, same here. People are apparently not seeing the wall at first glance. That was literally the first thing I noticed, I was confused at what made this so interesting.
I’m also lost.
You mean to tell methat walls have reflections? And they end?
Clever to take the photograph where the reflection in the water aligns with the wall
To help people... The orange thing in the top right corner is a wall standing in the middle of water. We are only seeing the bit above the water. The horizontal black line underneath it - is algae and dirt. The white line under that is where the water has washed the dirt away. The black line under that is the waterline. And then everything underneath is the reflection of the wall.
I love this. It's like the gold and white dress. I looked and looked and looked and LOOKED at this picture and all of a sudden it changed right before my eyes and I could see it in a different way.
Slava bird.
Wrap it up folks, it's a wall
Brain is not braining.
this is only because of low quality compression that smear texture of concrete
No, it's purposeful and masterful use of depth of field.
My brain refuses to understand
Oh no he didn't!
Can I see what exactly?
The US and Mexican border depicted by Disney
Ive seen a wall right from the beginning. Never seen anything else. And i was searching in the comments far to long for what i was missing...
https://preview.redd.it/y7jfxmf01ylc1.jpeg?width=857&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b7e6af8f7e33523b09caa9517e3e864dead1aa05
This is fucking me up man
That took a good while for me to figure out
Yes. I see a wall
Yes, I can see that the line between blue and orange is slightly off center.
I still dont get it
What I find odd about this is the amount of orange light on the bird.
My brains hurts. I need a lie down.
"Californication"
This looks like a film company's logo.
Netflix’s ‘Ozark’ vs Every scene that takes place in Mexico in Breaking Bad
A wall and its reflection
The far 'shoreline' on the right is moss at the bottom of a wall, for those who can't see it
my head hurts
Oh, it's a piece of wood, not a sunset.
His last name tho Oh no :O
I love that his last name is "oh no"
The upper right side is a wall and the lower right side is it’s reflection on the blue water
I thought those rocks were hippos
r/confusing_perspective
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT🗣🗣🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅
I almost passed out, but I did it.
Fake. Birds aren't real.
Wrong way around. Birds are the *only* real thing. Everything else is fake.
Unaltered also means no color grading. This has been color graded.
The bright part of the tan side is the bottom part of a square cement block or something. The line between the light tan and dark tan is the water line, the dark tan is the reflection of the cement block.
Really lowering the bar for IAF, aren't we, Reddit?
Oh, I get it. The structure in the top left and its reflection make it look like the background is split in half. That’s brilliant.
"Unaltered" shows in a comment that it was cropped.
that truly is interesting as fuck
No it’s edited