Talk:1213: Combination Vision Test

Number is "42". The 4 is composed of 2's and 3's and 7's. The 2 is composed of 3's and 7's and 9's. --RainbowDash (talk) 05:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

What about 7s? --81.23.24.34 06:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Also both have 5's. I'm not very good at this counting thing. That link below is way better, anyhow. --RainbowDash (talk) 05:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

http://i.imgur.com/BLIQR6w.png

Credit: http://www.reddit.com/user/silly-moose

Thanks --Zom-B (talk) 07:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not confident enough about this to write up an explanation, but given that synesthesia is a sensory experience where the senses blend into each other (hearing colors, tasting sounds, etc...) that a round shape or black and white (why is it not in color? that would help the joke imho) give the sense of a number to the synesthete. The alt text at least makes sense, seeing two big numbers fits with diplopia (double vision) and the squinting covers myopia (nearsightedness) so it is consistent with the main joke, but I feel like I'm really missing something in the main joke. Chexwarrior (talk) 06:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

In the original b&w image, I keep seeing an 8 on the right and a vague 0, 9, or 4 on the left. I'm not certain if the b&w actually has a definite "answer" or specific number(s) one is supposed to be seeing. I seem to recall an xkcd with an Ishihara test before (but can't find it so it may just be a confabulation), in which case this one may be a reference to that and actually have a referential "answer".

I'm not an optometrist, but Chexwarrior,'s explanation of the alt text seems correct to me. Plazma (talk) 07:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

On the left half, the number 9 is missing. Similarly, on the right the number 2 is missing. This makes the number 92 or 29 (any ideas?). There is a floating 2 in the bottom center, the origin is unknown but it does look like a decimal point but that yould defeat the purpose of the number 42 (any ideas?) --Zom-B (talk) 07:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking the explanation of the descriptive text (not alt-text) is as follows: the synesthesia is seeing numbers and associating colors with them. So when you look at the numbers in the image, you see certain colors, so the large numbers stand out because they are different colors from the background. But if you're colorblind, (hypothetically) then some of those number-colors might look the same and so the numbers (not sure why only one) would not be visible. Bplimley (talk) 07:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe if the synesthesia is as follows: Even numbers get one color and odd numbers get another color. I was actually able to see the 2 because of this effect, while I was in photoshop, zoomed in, and coloring the 3's. I know from myself that I have number to color synesthesia, but (in my case) that doesn't apply to a bunch of randomly placed digits like here, but only to complete numbers like "144" looks yellow, red, and white (in no particular order), while "38" looks grayish dark blue. --Zom-B (talk) 07:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I seriously doubt ANYONE have so "hard" case of number to color synesthesia it can "color" a bunch of randomly placed digits like this. Like ... if your number-recognizing neurons are working on the small numbers, how can they work on the big numbers in the same time? -- Hkmaly (talk) 09:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Good catch! I'm not sure how exactly how synesthesia works, but even if the perceived number (due to a perceived colour) further incites a perceived colour, you can still have a combined diagnostic. You just have to make sure that the big number is made up of little ones of the same number; or, atleast made of other numbers which are of the same colour as the desired big number. The latter requires that you assume synesthesia is one way only (for instance - perceiving number triggers colour, but not vice versa) 220.224.246.97 11:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

<Nitpicking> The alt text is slightly off the mark isn't it? Wouldn't a diplopic(?) person would see two images of the diagnostic rather than two numbers in the same diagnostic </Nitpicking> 220.224.246.97 11:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)