"Mr Macaw" wrote in message news
I saw it as light blue and gold. Which is what the photo was. You can
see it in the link below, and if you put it into a photo editor you'll see
the lighter areas have more B than R and G. And the darker areas have way
too much intensity for black. It's the camera that got it wrong, nothing
to do with colour perception. If you're seeing anything other than light
blue and gold, either your eyes are ****ed up, or your monitor is very
dark.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dr...ral_phenomenon)

Yes that's what I saw it as: white and gold. Or at least I saw it as very
pale blue and gold which I interpreted as white-and-gold with the camera set
for tungsten light and looking at daylight illumination - such a common
error (like the converse one) that the brain corrects for it.

How badly exposed and lit must it have been for black to reproduce as gold?

It's interesting that the majority of people saw it as it was supposed to be
rather than as it was actually portrayed in the photo. Of a very limited
sample (my wife, my sister, my brother in law and my parents) it was the
women who saw it as blue and black and the men who saw it as white (or pale
blue) and gold, despite the Wikipedia article saying that it was women who
disproportionately saw it as white/gold.

I wonder whether my wife/sister/mum might have been influenced by knowing
from the style/pattern of the dress what colours it was likely to be ("this
pattern is only made in these colours") whereas men may have had no prior
knowledge and saw so saw what was depicted.