Powered by KikBooks Widget

By on December 21, 2008, with 53 Comments

Some time ago I have received these 3 photos. It took me a day or two before I even figured what is so special about them. As you see, all three represent old architecture. But wait, something strange is going on. Are all those pillars where they normally should be? How about the horizontal post they hold? Can you spot the illusion in each photo? They have much to do with impossible objects. I’m not positively absolutely sure, but these images may have been manipulated digitally. What is your impression? Are we talking about some exotic shooting angle, or simply Photoshop job? You tell me…

3 Impossible Buildings For The Sunday Evening
3 Impossible Buildings For The Sunday Evening
3 Impossible Buildings For The Sunday Evening

Comments

53 Responses
  1. Anonymous says:

    Cool first comment! The pictures are inturesting, but a little boring. In the first one the top bar is not strate. In the sevond one the two posts do not line up. And, in the third one, well it looks crooked.

    • happydoodle says:

      they r a little boring bcuz at first they just look like regular old buildings. but wen u c wats so special about them its a little cool.

  2. Anonymous says:

    dont get last one

  3. Anonymous says:

    the bottom 2 are photoshopped, Its very obvious. however the first may be an optical illusion or it may be photoshopped

    The architects and builders back then had a much higher standard of workmanship than the builders these days. This would never of happened a 150+ years ago.

    Thus why historical buildings can last 1000′s of years and todays modern building has a lifepsam of about 50 years.

  4. Anonymous says:

    first comment?
    personally i think these are photoshopped

  5. Thomas says:

    The second one is definite photoshop. The shadows are being cast from the Sun on the right, so there should be a shadow from the pillars on the sidewalk, but there is no shadow.

  6. ambiguityanon says:

    First? Probably not.

    I love them!

  7. Willard says:

    First Comment ? O.o
    I’d say Photochopped… the second one for sure is. the other two could be either i suppose but i suspect all three are photoshoped

  8. Anonymous says:


    I dont see it.

    Can some one PLEASE tell me what is so special about these buildings?

    *ahem* first comment possibly

  9. Anonymous says:

    thats cool… but i agree look like its been digitally altered…. 1st?

  10. Anonymous says:

    The second one kinda looked photoshop edited…

  11. Anonymous says:

    It looks like a nice piece of photo shop to me.

    MB.

  12. bnwchbammer says:

    The first was pretty cool actually. The second really looked photoshoped, but the third might be real. Probably not, but it looks possible…iunno. anyway, cool as always.

  13. Shrekky says:

    Good pictures, but they are photoshopped, if you look closely around the anomolies, you can see slightly blurred edges

  14. Anonymous says:

    yea i think im first comment…
    but i dont really get these

  15. Lisa says:

    That’s so cool. I like the last one the most.

  16. Anonymous says:

    the second one is a giveaway that is been photoshopped..

  17. Kaillou says:

    yeah, well… I saw better in the past !!

  18. Sal says:

    These are lame. 1st one looks longer, but its just thicker.

    Second one…without a doubt photoshopped.

    As far as the last one, i really don’t notice anything special on it.

    Come on man, I check your site every day, but recently, it’s been going downhill. Go back to basics here, and stay away from these kind of lame viewer submissions.

  19. BraDRoBBo says:

    It surprises me when you say things like “It took me a day or two before I even figured what is so special about them.” :P! Being the owner of this site and all ;) heh… these are pretty cool, they don’t have an extreme waow effect though i guess… makes me think they’ve been digitally altered maybe, especially with the lack of shadow detail like on the second one those first two pillars look like the same pillar but altered slightly – i could indeed be wrong though, just saying.

  20. MyIQis168 says:

    Well the first one doesnt look photoshopped, But the second does.
    The third one doesnt really look impossible to me.. :/

  21. Andie says:

    i don’t see it! i only see it in the second photo…i think.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Photoshopped.

  23. Anonymous says:

    i spotted them all!!!!
    am i first????

  24. pretty princess says:

    dont get it at all (1st?)

  25. Norm says:

    Great! As an architect, I really enjoy these.

  26. drew XD says:

    1) it looks like it’s upside or something :S
    2)the one next to the arch on the right side is connected to the little ‘wall’ on the floor (best way to describe it) while all the others are in front of it
    3)all the lines are straight except the bottom half which looks wonky
    hope I helped!

  27. Anonymous says:

    i dont see anything in the first one, the other two are pretty cool though

  28. elliot says:

    I don’t think that 1 and 3 are fotoshopped bud the second one has to.
    I don’t see anything wrong with the first one it seems to be just correctly

  29. Illusionist says:

    Awful

  30. Dragana says:

    Second one is clearly photoshoped, you can see how the bases of the columns are blurred.

  31. david says:

    1st? Probably not..

    first two are manipulated I think, about the last on I’m not so sure. I’m not even convinced it’s an impossible object. It’s rather a picture from an obscuring angle.

    Love your site, keep it up!!

  32. samantha says:

    im not fully decided on the first and last ones but the second one is obviously done on computer because the first three look like they r going into the fotpath but the last three are no and if it was some angle thing those ones would be going into the footpath as well

    for those who cant see the differences
    1. the horizontal block does not line up even though the pillars are even
    2. the pillars are longer and look as if they are going into the footpath
    3.the left side of the building is is even but the right side goes diagnol

  33. Anonymous says:

    very nice,the illusion(if it is not photoshopped which I believe not)
    is only possible from a certain side of view as with most impossible objects.the ancient/old style structures combined with the impossible object illusion makes it even more interesting.

  34. Anonymous says:

    OMG, these are so photoshopped its not even funny!! you can tell in the last one that the top two windows have been cloned to make the building look ‘strange’! I’m an estate agent and i use similar tools to remove other agents boards from our property pictures!

    i’m actually quite disapointed at this entry, i must be really sad!

    merry xmas all! xx

  35. yawn................. says:

    I get it but these are sligtly boring…….definitely edited, quite stupid as its meant to be an optical illusion whereas these are possible but impractical and heavily edited :(

  36. Anonymous says:

    If you look at the second one you can see that the first 3 pillars look extremely different than the last four so I say photo shop…

  37. Anonymous says:

    :0 phoootoooshopppeddd !!!

    they are mainly just crooked in some places, e.g. the pillars in the 2nd and 3rd pic and in the first pic to the left, the bar on top is smaller than the rest goign outwards…

  38. Rahul says:

    really bored with these sort of illusions.

  39. Jan says:

    hey the second one is in antigua guatemala!

  40. Anonymous says:

    the problem with the 3rd one is the angles of the walls. at the top the corner is a right angle, at the bottom it looks obtuse, more like 120 degrees, which wouldn’t be possible.

  41. Mika Cope says:

    i think these are real buildings….. not photo shopped.

  42. Jonathan says:

    SPOILER
    ~~~~~~~

    Or rather, two spoilers and an opinion…

    1) The base of the block spanning the middle gap has been photoshopped down/away from the viewer. It appears to be sitting towards the back of the square section on the top of the columns, whereas the equivalent blocks to the right and left are sitting at the front and middle of the square.

    2) The bases of the first three columns have been extruded downwards across the pavement.

    3) Doesn’t look impossible to me, there’s just no reason to build wonkily like this :¬)

  43. llonkyram1 says:

    i think the last picture was photoshopped…..it was neatly cropped…

  44. jim says:

    definitely all are photoshopped..
    quite easy
    the 1st is easier to do coz the background is plain blue..
    the 2nd one is a bad finishing for the pillar..
    the 3rd one is a crop, copy , distort and paste from th e same image.. nice job on this one..

  45. cheyenne says:

    there must be somthing rong wit this 11 yr olds i’z cuz i think all of these r completely POSSIBLE!

  46. uraib says:

    hmmm…idont see it can sumwon help me plzz

  47. anoncoward says:

    Photoshopped???? Of course they are!! You can’t defy the laws of physics without photoshop.

  48. jesse says:

    i bilieve the first image has NOT BEEN PHOTOSHOPED. let me explain why:
    1. the first two pillars and the last two pillars are holding two different beams!!
    2. the first two hold one pillar and they are a step ahead of the last two
    3. the photographer was standing near the second pillar and so the zig-zag corner between the middle two pillars can not be viewed since it is right behind the second pillar infront of the photographer

  49. jesse says:

    …moreover, if you wats closely, between the two middle pillars at the beam level, u will realize that the vertical stones dont match, and there is a very faint line right at the corner going straight up to the stones btw these two middle pilars

  50. Jeff says:

    Third one is a definite, obvious photoshop. The top two stories have EXACTLY the same stone patterns as the bottom two. NEVER found in nature.

Speak Your Mind

You can add some images too.

Pinterest