Comment on the unseen worlds

Chivera@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• fossilesque@mander.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Image

  I saved this image for a Caption this.

  source

  • Matty_r@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “Bird Vision activate!”

    Walks straight into glass door

    source
  • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That’s great! Any guesses what the bottom bars are about on either side of the ‘heart thing’?

    source

    • Techranger@infosec.pub ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Saddam Hussein in UV light.

      source
    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s very unclear/nonsensical

      source
    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I spent like twenty minutes looking. I’m stumped!

      source
    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Cone count is my guess. Of the photoreceptors in the eye - Rods see in low-light and cones see in color. Some animals lack or have different cones compared to humans. Hence why bees can see “bee purple”

      source

      • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        It seems to be a commonly used image stolen from Klaus Schmidt …blogspot.com/…/bird vision but strangely none seem to have the lower bit. How odd…

        source
• StellarExtract@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Technically no, this photographer is putting flowers under a blacklight and photographing them, resulting in a picture of basically what a human would see IRL in that scenario (aside from things like contrast/exposure variances, etc). It’s not really the same as what UV sensing animals would see. These photos are of regions of the flower converting UV light into human-visible visible light (via fluorescence, same thing as a blacklight poster). UV sensing animals are seeing actual ultraviolet being reflected by the flower as well as visible light, so it’s not the same thing.

  source