Aside from one or two outliers, those who believe a tennis ball is yellow saw the dress as gold and white, while those who believe a tennis ball is green saw the dress as black and blue.
I'm in the gold/white and yellow camp
Jane says yellow. I say green.
The Crayola crayon matching it is "Spring Green", IIRC.
I think that on the continuum from pure yellow to pure green, English speakers start calling the hue "green" very close to pure yellow.
I'd venture that's the case with all of the other transitions between primary and secondary colors... getting to the secondary from the primary is the quickest. So that the range of the purplest red to the orangest red is much smaller than the range from the reddest orange to the yellowest orange. But there might be some differences in the particulars, as well, and I think yellow might become green the fastest.
YES. "SPRING GREEN".
Update: So glad that worked.
I'm getting Alternate Suggestions of the exact value of
SPRING GREEN or
SPRING GREEN.
Apparently I'm an outlier. I'd call a tennis ball more green than yellow, saw white/gold.
I don't even remember color dress I first saw. Of course, that was before my Tide Pod diet, when I could see colors.
Now you can taste colors!
yes, but only Orange and Blue.
Or is that gold and white?
You got gold and white Tide Pods?
I’m an outlier then as I see white gold and green.
I watched some curling highlights on the NBC site.
One thing I noticed is that NBC's announcers follow the tradition I'm familiar with and refers to players by their last names, while the CBC announcers use a lot of first names, calling the Swiss Skip "Silvana".
I wish NBC's announcers would do a better job of explaining the strategies teams are using. They do it once in a while, but mostly they just describe the shots as they come. I'd like to hear, before the shot is made, "Here are their options. They could do this, but if they do then the other team might do that and if they miss it this is what could happen. On the other hand, they could do that, but if they do then the other other team might do this and if they miss here's what could happen." I love watching it, but I'd like them to do a better job of teaching me the strategies so I could try to think along with the players.
Chances are they're not doing that so as to help conceal US team's cluelessness
But the Women's team isn't that feckless.
I agree and the Canadian announcers do it too.
I assume that was because the Canadians could assume their audience has a familiarity with the basics of the sport.
The TSN broadcasts (ESPN 3 streaming) so an excellent job of that to the point where they use the telestrater to disagree what the possibilities are. The Brier is coming up in a couple of weeks, so that would be a great time to get that exposure.
WOOOOOO CANADA!!!! Homan's last stone in the 5th gave Japan nothing to work with.
That was not a good shot by Fujisawa.
After Canada responds to Japan's 2 in the sixth with 2 of their own, Japan concedes (8-3).
HPR says "They're giving up? I'd never give up!" I told him that's not really curling.
Canada now tied for fourth in the standings, and they've already played Korea and Sweden (the two teams well above them).
They have Denmark (1-4, currently tied with the US in the 8th), OAR (1-5, just got destroyed by Switzerland 11-2), and Scotland (one of the teams tied with them).
So, uh, Fergie. Um... wow.
USA-CAN not horrible so far.
announcers seem more informative this time.
Maybe they read the WGOM?
I'm just watching it now (already had the end spoiled for me on Twitter. ah well) The Scottish guy has definitely been the best announcer so far. Informative without over explaining everything as if people watching have never heard of curling before. (The British guy is pretty bad about this)
Watched the end on replay: Canadian announcers quite impressed with Shuster. This is why he's the Vikings, right?
I watched it this morning, too. I had the thought that y'all were too hard on Shuster because his performance seemed pretty good (though totally missing in the second (or third...?) was not good), but then I remembered that he is the vikings.
Credit where it's due, he played really well in this one. His third also finally contributed, which helps a lot.
Who is his third? Mustache guy?
Watching the women: This one could be over early. Wang has the Shusters.
Two of the other matches: Sweden-Japan and Switzerland-Scotland could be good when this one's done.
China still playing... and the hog-line lights are faulty?
I am at the hammer for the third end. When do the Chinese concede?
Tennis ball: green or yellow?
I'm in the gold/white and yellow camp
Jane says yellow. I say green.
The Crayola crayon matching it is "Spring Green", IIRC.
I think that on the continuum from pure yellow to pure green, English speakers start calling the hue "green" very close to pure yellow.
I'd venture that's the case with all of the other transitions between primary and secondary colors... getting to the secondary from the primary is the quickest. So that the range of the purplest red to the orangest red is much smaller than the range from the reddest orange to the yellowest orange. But there might be some differences in the particulars, as well, and I think yellow might become green the fastest.
YES. "SPRING GREEN".
Update: So glad that worked.
I'm getting Alternate Suggestions of the exact value of
SPRING GREEN or
SPRING GREEN.
Apparently I'm an outlier. I'd call a tennis ball more green than yellow, saw white/gold.
I don't even remember color dress I first saw. Of course, that was before my Tide Pod diet, when I could see colors.
Now you can taste colors!
yes, but only Orange and Blue.
Or is that gold and white?
You got gold and white Tide Pods?
I’m an outlier then as I see white gold and green.
I watched some curling highlights on the NBC site.
One thing I noticed is that NBC's announcers follow the tradition I'm familiar with and refers to players by their last names, while the CBC announcers use a lot of first names, calling the Swiss Skip "Silvana".
I wish NBC's announcers would do a better job of explaining the strategies teams are using. They do it once in a while, but mostly they just describe the shots as they come. I'd like to hear, before the shot is made, "Here are their options. They could do this, but if they do then the other team might do that and if they miss it this is what could happen. On the other hand, they could do that, but if they do then the other other team might do this and if they miss here's what could happen." I love watching it, but I'd like them to do a better job of teaching me the strategies so I could try to think along with the players.
Chances are they're not doing that so as to help conceal US team's cluelessness
But the Women's team isn't that feckless.
I agree and the Canadian announcers do it too.
I assume that was because the Canadians could assume their audience has a familiarity with the basics of the sport.
The TSN broadcasts (ESPN 3 streaming) so an excellent job of that to the point where they use the telestrater to disagree what the possibilities are. The Brier is coming up in a couple of weeks, so that would be a great time to get that exposure.
WOOOOOO CANADA!!!! Homan's last stone in the 5th gave Japan nothing to work with.
That was not a good shot by Fujisawa.
After Canada responds to Japan's 2 in the sixth with 2 of their own, Japan concedes (8-3).
HPR says "They're giving up? I'd never give up!" I told him that's not really curling.
Canada now tied for fourth in the standings, and they've already played Korea and Sweden (the two teams well above them).
They have Denmark (1-4, currently tied with the US in the 8th), OAR (1-5, just got destroyed by Switzerland 11-2), and Scotland (one of the teams tied with them).
So, uh, Fergie. Um... wow.
USA-CAN not horrible so far.
announcers seem more informative this time.
Maybe they read the WGOM?
I'm just watching it now (already had the end spoiled for me on Twitter. ah well) The Scottish guy has definitely been the best announcer so far. Informative without over explaining everything as if people watching have never heard of curling before. (The British guy is pretty bad about this)
Watched the end on replay: Canadian announcers quite impressed with Shuster. This is why he's the Vikings, right?
I watched it this morning, too. I had the thought that y'all were too hard on Shuster because his performance seemed pretty good (though totally missing in the second (or third...?) was not good), but then I remembered that he is the vikings.
Credit where it's due, he played really well in this one. His third also finally contributed, which helps a lot.
Who is his third? Mustache guy?
Watching the women: This one could be over early. Wang has the Shusters.
Two of the other matches: Sweden-Japan and Switzerland-Scotland could be good when this one's done.
China still playing... and the hog-line lights are faulty?
I am at the hammer for the third end. When do the Chinese concede?
Wow Japan.
I am a bit behind. First end was nearly a suplex (Greco-Roman wrestling term. Throw ends the match).
Good lord. 7-1 after three ends.
Not here.