Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

BrandGSX t1_j1ykqjj wrote

I would like to assume it was a chemist/engineer developing color flash photography who knew better.

535

betterannamac t1_j1yn0w2 wrote

I mean, maybe, but I’d like to assume OP’s thought! That would have been hilarious!

167

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1ykt8l wrote

You never know. And it’s not like that would be an easy thing to predict.

−143

pleasegivemealife t1_j1yqseh wrote

Well if he created the first photo he must be smart enough to understand. If not they all will be subject to the Spanish inquisition.

144

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1yv7fj wrote

It wasn’t necessarily the first person to make a color photo who first saw it. And I’m not saying like 100% fully believe the person is possessed.

−32

Fangore t1_j207sht wrote

You think for colour photos, the scientists took one and thought "fuck it good enough to take out to the public." There were probably months, if not years of testing. Somewhere in that time, they def came across this issue.

32

StaleTheBread OP t1_j2081tg wrote

Oh good point. Thanks for pointing that out. I guess I at least though a scientist would be like “Jesus, what is with your eyes!” But that’s while they’re also testing anyway so they’ve probably seen worse stuff already. Also I didn’t consider how creepy negatives are already.

−6

phenixreborn t1_j20lr1a wrote

I dont understand why you are getting so many downvotes, its a funny concept

19

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20m2ft wrote

Thanks. And there’s much dumber things people post on this sub. They probably get their fair share of corrections though.

Oh, and remember when people used to say “when you wish upon a star, that star is billions of light years away and is dead by now.”? That was so easily disprovable but it went around the internet so much

2

MrNobody_0 t1_j20b93m wrote

It's amazing how easy things are to predict when you understand the science behind it.

15

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20dyi5 wrote

Yeah. But a lot of times science is like “whoa, that’s freaky! I wonder why that happens”

2

nofmxc t1_j20iyur wrote

Wow, this comment section really turned on OP...

10

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20jptx wrote

:I

1600 upvotes for the post and most of my comments in the negatives lol. I guess only people who wanna correct me go into the comments.

And they took it so literally lol

7

nobecauselogic t1_j1zlpox wrote

Optics engineer: Hmm, their eyes picked up the flash. Should we redesign to try to fix that?

Product designer: Nah, people will want a camera with the flash built in.

371

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20lp2q wrote

Yeah I guess the people making it would notice. But the consumers wouldn’t all know what it is.

Hell, there’s still people who believe in ghosts because of “light orbs” in pictures. And more recently video compression has led people to believe in lizard person conspiracies

86

Slyfox023 t1_j231vvj wrote

Well you can't really prove ghost don't exist, there is evidence besides "orbs"

−1

vundercal t1_j22v9r5 wrote

Product designer: we’ll just have the software remove it

Software engineer: 😒

2

fatman06 t1_j206knl wrote

Not quite the same but there were churches that believed cameras would steal your soul.

Source

70

HermitHemorrhage t1_j22h5su wrote

This is the sort of thing I hoped to see in the comments, not all this camera technobabble!

2

honkwoodcourt t1_j25gkpk wrote

Dr Mr Munshi would reject such concept.

>!...nobody's gonna get this reference, right?!<

1

Djinn42 t1_j1yr9wb wrote

Unless the person was scientifically minded vs superstitious...

54

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1yv2ue wrote

They’d still freak out though. Like yeah eventually they’d be like “well there’s gotta be some reason for this.” But there would be a moment of “Jesus what the fuck?”

24

uncertain_expert t1_j20wate wrote

PSA: if you take a flash-photo of a child and they show white-eye rather than red-eye, this is an indicator of a cancer called Retinoblastoma - you should ensure they see an ophthalmologist as soon as possible. https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Retinoblastoma

38

LittleAstrophysicist t1_j21uzyh wrote

Is this only true in children?

7

malary1234 t1_j233l1y wrote

Yes it’s a childhood cancer. Any adult can get a childhood cancer but it is very rare. For example one of my family members is dying of Ewing’s cancer currently.

2

malary1234 t1_j233h4p wrote

I came here to make sure this was noted. Even with our new fancy phone cameras make sure you sure flash occasionally with your child to make sure you are monitoring for this! If you see it have it investigated immediately, this is not one of those thing you can wait on.

1

RingGiver t1_j1zo42r wrote

People in the past weren't stupid. They were smarter than the kind of person who thinks that simply being of an earlier time makes you stupid.

35

J8ke_Stampede t1_j20b7u7 wrote

This is a great thing to understand. People have this misconception that humans are much smarter now purely because of technological advances

13

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20cl8v wrote

I’m not trying to say everyone was superstitious. Like, I don’t mean 100% believing someone is possessed and cowering in fear. More like “what the hell is with your eyes”

8

J8ke_Stampede t1_j20f6n7 wrote

That's not what your post conveys

−2

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20k9yd wrote

Welp. Bad phrasing on my part though.

Also I feel like Reddit there’s some sort of dichotomy of “people who think about everything rationally” and “people who believe in dumb shit”. Or maybe I’m just trying to justify why so many people felt the need to correct me

2

BaloonPriest t1_j22b4hx wrote

Redditors do be obnoxious fucks most of the time. Pay it no mind.

3

ScoroScope t1_j21qvfa wrote

Don’t even apologize to these grifters. OP had no reason to take this post so seriously but comment sections on Reddit tend to be full of the sensitive types. One look at their profile tells you why they’re really triggered by your post

2

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1zwqx2 wrote

Look, I’m not saying they shouted “witch” and burned them at the stake (especially considering this was like mid-1900s?) but they’d be freaked out. Hell, people still believe in ghosts now and a good bit of that is still from camera stuff

6

RingGiver t1_j1zytui wrote

>(especially considering this was like mid-1900s?)

Somehow, it's both a century before you think and a lot more recent than you think.

11

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1zz05u wrote

I’m talking about color film being common. Is that more recent?

1

RingGiver t1_j20blvb wrote

1890s was when it became available outside of experimental stuff.

The optical stuff behind red eyes was understood before film capable of storing color was invented.

5

MikeLemon t1_j20mkx8 wrote

Based on the "8th grade test from 1895" (I think that is the year) that is floating around the internet, I think it is fair to say modern day people are the stupid ones.

Found it-

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/p_test/1895_Eightgr_test.htm

4

wombey12 t1_j212y2d wrote

>A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?

At least one, probably.

>Who were the following: Morse, Whitney, Fulton, Bell, Lincoln, Penn, and Howe.

Morse is that detective off the TV, Whitney was that woman who wants to dance with somebody, Penn is that magician who works with Teller, Howe is the former manager of AFC Bournemouth.

3

InfernalRodent t1_j21gx3y wrote

Morse- Invented the telegraph,hence Morse Code

Whitney- Cotton gin,would have tanked the South's economy if they hadn't done it with the war

Fulton-No idea

Lincoln-President

Penn-No idea

Howe-No idea

The fact I remember any of that would shock my teachers I'm sure.

1

MikeLemon t1_j21yenu wrote

Penn- Pennsylvania, Howe might be General George Howe (no idea what he did), and I want to say Fulton invented something.

1

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20l6p9 wrote

Ironically, I’m usually annoyed by people who assume people in the past are dumb (it’s crazy how much people over-exaggerate how bad the Middle Ages are). Guess I’m the dumb one this time though

2

MrT735 t1_j204jm8 wrote

Camera flashes go way back to the glass-plate era, so it would have been grey-eyes at first, and people would have realised that it was a reflection of the flash.

25

canigetahoohelp t1_j1zri8p wrote

I assumed someone saw red-eye in real life first and then tried to capture it.

8

StaleTheBread OP t1_j1zwiru wrote

Does it show up in real life?

5

canigetahoohelp t1_j2016f5 wrote

Yes! I was once laying down kind of parallel with an open window talking to a friend who screamed mid sentence when I tilted my head a certain way haha. She then realized what was happening and took a video so I could see! Super weird but pretty cool

6

StaleTheBread OP t1_j201q2s wrote

Oh wow! I always thought it was something to do with cameras picking up light in a different way than we do. But I guess I was mixing up film cameras with cheap digital cameras that don’t filter IR.

I guess it has something to do with the angle of the flash and how we don’t usually see each others eyes at the right angle and lighting for something like that.

Edit: thank you for answering my question. Other people on here don’t seem to have much patience

9

Trooper_Sicks t1_j20l2iy wrote

>I guess it has something to do with the angle of the flash and how we don’t usually see each others eyes at the right angle and lighting for something like that.

I was told its because the flash bounces off the back of our eyes back into the camera, cameras with an anti red eye shines a light into your eye before the flash so your eyes contract in reaction and so less likely for the flash to bounce out compared to if they were dilated

4

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20lcum wrote

Wow, that’s really interesting! And we don’t usually look at people getting light shined right into their eyes so we rarely see it outside of photos

3

canigetahoohelp t1_j20cuk5 wrote

Yeah no problem! I see you’re getting downvoted for asking the question… sometimes human beings don’t know things until they ask. Happy to share some insight! It’s definitely the angle of the light/flash.

2

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20dqxm wrote

Thanks! I wish people actually read the comments before posting. Then they’d know plenty of people already corrected me

Edit: also I wish people wouldn’t take me so literally. I’m not trying to say early photographers were cowering in fear at the thought of demons.

And on top of that, even if the literal “first” people to see it knew, it doesn’t mean they knew to inform consumers. They may have though, “eh, they’ll be smart enough to not freak out” and then maybe consumers freaked out.

4

BaloonPriest t1_j22bf2u wrote

You should've just rolled with it. "My child, offer the spine of your firstborn to me for unimaginable riches and power"

2

defygod t1_j217pb1 wrote

i remember finding a weird website/blog of people who thought little “orbs” of lights in photos were spirits

7

StaleTheBread OP t1_j218pl6 wrote

Yeah, that’s pretty common among people who believe in ghosts

4

feor1300 t1_j210lco wrote

There's lots of funny stuff you can imagine people discovering. Like imagine being the guy who discovered popcorn. Sitting around one evening and all of a sudden supper explodes.

6

Unkindlake t1_j224c6t wrote

Why is there a conspiracy for everything else on the planet, but not that?

4

Imnotawerewolf t1_j204ehe wrote

I mean, I used to think that when I was little lol I remember specifically my cousin had a picture of her dog in her room with that effect and it creeped me out so bad for some reason

3

OsakaJack t1_j210ja1 wrote

They are, though. Every time you have your picture taken, a doorway in your soul allows a demon in. Or am I misunderstanding something.

3

Entronico t1_j216gk4 wrote

No way. I'd just present it at my next "Vampires Are Real" News conference.

2

fish-rides-bike t1_j21g0sm wrote

Unlikely as that person would have been at the forefront of optical science and known in a second that they were seeing a reflection off the back wall of the eyeball.

2

Ok-Software-1902 t1_j22wu8u wrote

I imagine it was more like “oh, looks like humans also do the reflective eye thing that we see in dogs and owls and stuff when we shine lights on them”

2

StaleTheBread OP t1_j23o7td wrote

I think “humans exhibiting qualities typically seen in animals” is still pretty creepy to some people. Look at vampires and werewolves for instance.

1

postitsam t1_j23ccq8 wrote

Wonder how many kids these days haven't ever seen that effect. It must be like 15 years since I used a digital camera that did that.

2

Showerthoughts_Mod t1_j1yki5y wrote

This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.

Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"

(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)

Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.

1

MrMoussab t1_j20biuo wrote

Or maybe just assumed there is something wrong with the camera. Not all people believe in being possessed and stuff

1

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20cu4t wrote

I’m not talking about full belief. Just initial reation

4

Kanden_27 t1_j20c3oo wrote

I would assume they would test it on more than just one person and not draw the conclusion from that.

1

StaleTheBread OP t1_j20cozf wrote

I’m not taking about drawing conclusions. I’m talking about immediate gut reaction.

3

Bridazzles t1_j22hhcm wrote

What’s worse is knowing that a whole lot of people won’t even know what this is.

1

Octochil6 t1_j234ovq wrote

Pretty sure the first person to get camera flashed was burned at stake or was that fake

1