Oh, wow. I looked at it for about a minute the first time, and identified three things I thought might be a cat. Then I came back to the page a few minutes later, and saw exactly what y’all are on about right away. Well-blended indeed.
Has anyone noticed the goat wearing the British judicial wig in the bottom right hand corner? Or is it just me?
I used to love these sorts of things when they were in ‘Highlights’ magazine for kids.
I heard that the army used to use similar types of images, possibly even drawn by the same author who drew for ‘Highlights’, as part of the training for people who would be analyzing aerial spy photographs.
I’m having a really hard time finding a cite for that, partially bc I’m not really sure how to search for it, so take it with a grain of salt. I’ll work on it.
Also, as I noted before, problems such as “where is the cat?” And " what is this a picture of? " are extremely hard for even the most powerful supercomputers. Part of the reason is that it isn’t about processing power, or like facial recognition where you can have the computer recognize things such as eyes is lips that are relatively the same proportions and same distance away. The cat could be any color, any size, in the foreground, in the background, showing any side, etc. So what would you even tell the computer to search for?
The same problem lies with having a computer tell you what a picture is “about”. Say there is a picture of Dick Cheney with his buddies in the woods. Should the computer, which only sees pixels and doesn’t sense the aggregate, return that as a result for pictures of " dick Cheney ", " hunting, " "forest, " or “vice president”? In the same vein, is that picture shown here of grass, trees, or the other, hidden thing?
It’s relatively easy for a person to do because of our miraculously efficient pattern finding brains, next to a possible for a computer. So what Google is doing it is having human beings identify what pictures are ‘of’ and using the aggregate of the human input to categorize the pics.
But I digress, sorry. I just find it fascinating that something that is natural for us is so hard for a computer, despite its vast computational abilities.
I’ll work on finding cites if I’m not lazy.
I found it within seconds, my wife spotted it instantly. I don’t get the difficulty.
My difficulty (with this set of pictures, anyway) is related entirely to my screen’s brightness. I have it set sort of low right now; turning it up a bit, the “hidden” things can be spotted fairly quickly.
where’s the damn snake? (post 13?)
The snake’s tail is just above the green leaf towards the bottom of the pic, directly above the h in copperhead. Snake lies in a west-northwest direction from there.
It took me 3-5 seconds, but only because I was looking for a cat. If you just told me to look at the picture I probably wouldn’t have known there was a cat in it. Or a clown.
Well, I really don’t see any snake, so if this is a joke it’s not very OHHOLYSHITITSAFUCKINGHIDDENSNAKEKILLTHESNAKEKILLDIESNAKEKILLITDIEDIEDIE
I’ve made this one my wallpaper for a few days. For those having trouble seeing some of the others, that’s a quick way to blow them up for a better view. And, as some have said, once you “see” the hidden thing, you can’t unsee it.
Thanks - I see it now - still only see about half of the snake - but it helps, should I ever be walking in the woods - if I see that picture I’ll know to go south-east instead.
I found the cat in seconds. But our kitty harmonized with our decor and was sometimes difficult to spot.
Heh, I had a black cat who(I quickly learned) turned invisible at night. I walked through the kitchen one night on my way to the bathroom, and there were these two glowing yellow eyes that seemed to be hovering in midair. Turns out it was just Marshall, on the kitchen table. Scared me to death!
I saw it.
There it is!