Twin Tables Optical Illusion

As you may noticed, these two tables appear to have very different dimensions. In fact, the length of the green table is identical to the width of the red table. Also the length of the red table is identical to width of the green table. Quite impossible to believe, right? I attached another image to this post to show you that I was right (like I always am ;). Jump inside this post to see the proof! Very similar illusion can be found inside “relative sizes” category – “Table Tops Illusion“.

120 Replies to “Twin Tables Optical Illusion”

  1. The relative size of the tables is no illusion. They are different sizes. Proving they are the same size by showing false true lengths on a perspective drawing is a trick. It’s like saying the moon is the same size as a dime.

  2. I’m sorry… but you’re using 2D lines to measure something 3D. It obviously distorts the distances.

    Seen from any other point of view, this tables would have clearly different dimensions. At least that’s what my mind tells me.

  3. This is an wrong one, i think. The blue and yellow lines on the image should be along all the length (width) of the table, not fully vertical (horizontal) to give the actual measure of the table. The only illusion is that it might appear they haven’t the same size in the image, but they are not the same actual size.

    I can’t explain it as I’d like to, because I’m spanish and my english is not very fluently :P

    Anyway, you’re always on my iGoogle :D

  4. the only problem with your rightness is that you are not completely right. the angles of the table and the lines are diffrent giving the idea that they are the same size. if you go from centerline to centerline on opposing sides the lines would be different.

  5. Interesting illusion…but I don’t know if I’m buying it! The blue line on the green table and the yellow line on the red table look slightly slanted. Shouldn’t they be straight up and down if they really are the exact same size?!?

  6. I had to get out my ruler on this one. I thought, no way he’s right. You’ve proven me wrong again. Great illusion!

  7. Interesting. Observe that only the middles are the same. The edges of the tables are not the same due to the perspective. In other words, the blue and yellow lines used for comparison are of a different perspective than the tables. That’s what tricks your eye.

  8. if you have a lcd screen try looking at the picture from near enough above the screen… meaning stand above your screen and look down at the image.. you will notice a big change in the image

  9. Its obvious isn’t it?

    The reason they dont look the same is because of the thicker parts south of the table tops, these make u think that the vertical part is a higher measurement and the horizontal art is a lower one

  10. Hm, the wording the length is identical is not correct. The length/width of the tables is certainly not identical, but just their projected lengths as measured by pixels on the screens is. Nevertheless, a nice optical illusion, since its hard to tell you brain to think in pixels rather than in physical extensions, even if you know you should to this in this case ;)

  11. Better yet, measure the four sides of each table, and you will find that the tables themselves are not square. Therefore, no claims that the length of one equal the width of the other can be supported, since neither table has a constant length or width!

  12. You’re wrong. You can’t measure it the way you’re doing it. You’re not doing the measurement on the plane of the table tops. You need a “perspective ruler”.

    One way to see that is counting the number of (squared) floor tyles. Clearly, for the green table/blue orientation you have 5 tiles between the feet of the table and for the red table/blue orientation you have 3 and 1/2.

    Counting for the red table/yellow orientation you see again 3 and 1/2 tiles, meaning it is square. The green one clearly isn’t (5×2 and 1/4 ?)

  13. Quite impossible??
    na, you are simply missing the point of projected images.
    I would have believed that ther is any illusion if the visible width of any table is same through out its height, and its not.

    That means with your way of measureing width and heights all tables will show this effect. ha ha. Thats not optical illusion but ignorance in measurements:)…

  14. I measured, I couldn’t get it. The yellow lines are closer to the same size than the blue ones (which were about 0.25″ different). But maybe that’s just me!

  15. That doesn’t take perspective into account. Use just the shapes with no legs and see what we get.

    *deleting the widget*

  16. I don’t think it is an optical illusion – green one appears longer because the pixels are spaced far apart vertically than horizontally?


  17. This illusion is wrong… As the tables are angled from the point of view, the lines shouldn’t be horizontal/vertical but instead follow the angle of the table. If you draw the lines correctly, they aren’t of the same dimension.

  18. they aren’t proportional. they are different sizes by the tiles on the floor and the legs. but the table tops are the same size.

  19. Wow!
    Put my ruler up to the monitor!! So cool! How come when u rotate the pic, the red 1 doesn’t go rectangular and vice versa with the green one??

  20. hmmm, green table, looking at the tile on the ground, is 5 squares in length. red table side to side is 3 and a half squares width. red table is 3.5 squares long. with the green being 2.5 wide. am imissing something here?

  21. Now THAT is an awesome illusion! I had to measure them myself to be sure! Thanks for putting up illusions that boggle the mind!

  22. this doesnt seem possible but a quick flick of the ruler says ur (as always) right!but why, is it perspective, or just the different colours?

  23. you are wrong…the dimensions of the two table are not vertical and orizontal (like you think) but are lean according to prospective’s rules…so the two table are different…

  24. not if you measure the length camparing it to the pattern on the floor.. i dont know how to express it better. then they are not even.

    its a cool illusion.. but if we used this way to measure stuff then we d have a problem…

  25. the tables are not identical … if you use a ruler and measure the legths of the tables … the green one is 1/4 of and inch longer

  26. i dont get thet at all! its really weird and confusing cuz the red table looks square and the green one a rectangle…
    how can they be the same size?

  27. There’s actually about an 1/8″ difference on the green tables length and the red tables width but that’s still very good becuase the margin looks to be greater than that. The other dimensions are the same.


    Hi mate either you have really bad eye vison or you’re a bad illusionist , those 2 tables are NOT the same dimension in lenght and width and i can prove it too. I’d take the images of the screen if i were you, as its its just an in-correct ploy to attract people to whatever it is your advertising

  29. I still find this hard to believe. that’s kinda crazy b/c they really look very different. Is it all b/c of perspective or does it have something to do with the background?

  30. When you see it as a 2d-image, yes. But when you see it as a 3d-image, no. Our brain translates the height (blue line) of the green table to the depth, that’s why whe think it’s longer. When you look at the same blue line on the red table, our brain doesn’t need to translate this into depth, as it is not moving away from us.

    Sorry for my bad English, hope you understand.


  31. i get how it works! the green table is farther off the ground, so it is bigger because it is closer, and the red table is down farther.

  32. The secret here is not to use perspective; the mesurements should be used in the plain image itself. This meas not to use the tiles on the floor to compare the tables.

  33. Yes, the tiles show that the lengths and widths are actually different.

    This is the equivalent of using a yard stick stuck upright in the sand to measure the distance of the ocean from the beach to the horizon. Still cool though!

  34. Naruwan (“98th comment)
    —–> great analogy!!!!!!!!!!!

    Vurdlak was merely showing that the lines are the same, in context. Obviously, if you wanted to know the actual 3-d length/width, you’d have to measure parallel to the sides of the table (as mentioned by Norhild 9th comment).

    But this is why it’s an optical illusion people!!! ;-)
    Regardless how you look at it, I still think this is great illusion and it’s a wonderful….dare I say, table conversation piece?

  35. well if you measure the length of a man in a photograph to be equal to the height of a mountain in the background and find them to be equal in size to be an illusion, then this one is too.

  36. They are actually NOT the same dimensions. The blue line should not be going at a 90* angle on the page, but from the table’s edge, so it is not the length of the green table but in face falls short of the actual length. So even though the blue lines are the same size on the page, it should in face be longer on the green table, which it is not. The same can be said for the yellow line on the red table.

  37. OK, break out your ruler……..this is a lie. The width is not the same as the length on either of them….. Don’t believe everything you see or read…. CHECK FOR YOURSELF!!!!

  38. Ohhh. The same goes on the picture with the yellow and blue lines. The yellow lines are different sizes, as are the blue lines.

  39. RUBBISH!!! if you look at the amount of patterned squares/tles between the width of the red and length of the green you can blatantly see that the green has far more than the red

  40. It’s correct. You can’t count by the tiles because the tiles get smaller as they go back. The tiles do not accurately show measurement.

    It IS supposed to be going 90 degrees down because it measures perception and not actual length or width.

    You guys are making stupid arguments that don’t apply with the rules of the illusion. It’s an illusion of optics and not one of actuality. The tables are very well different lengths and widths in reality but because of perception they look the same. That’s what the illusion is saying.

  41. Wow you all look like fools…. The width is not affected by perspective…… you CANNOT compare width and lentgth by measuring the lines on your screen !!!!!!!! this is why it looks wrong but is “true”

  42. Nice Illusion. The objects in the picture are in an isometric view and the blue and yellow strips (in the 2nd photo) are two dimentional.

  43. instead of saying the width and length of the tables, it should have stated the width and length of the rhombus’. it’s the background percepting distance and angle making us think they are different sized tables

  44. If you have an iPhone or similar phone, hold the phone about foot or so from your face then begin to tilt the screen downward slowly. At one point the shapes will be the same (visually to you). As you keep tilting the screen eventually the red table becomes more like a rectangle and the green table like a square.

  45. Oh man, this 1 is troubling me. I saw it in a vid and googled it, but still don’t get what the illusion is supposed be, what is really happening, or what the crooked vertical lines are supposed to mean. I get that they are 2d lines on a 3d pic, but that’s about it…I need further help

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *