From Voice ~ Topics: design thinking, industrial design
The Art of Camo
Camouflage, you might think, is about blending in. But just as often, and especially these days, it’s about standing out. Camouflage hides shapes by generating hints of many other possible shapes. Instead of staying silent, in other words, camouflage succeeds by being noisy: it hides signal with noise. Socially and esthetically, too, camouflage is more and more often about advertising allegiance.
We are looking for a few good pixels
Only Marines can wear the new MARPAT pattern (tiny anti-copying devices protect it from unscrupulous army-navy store vendors) and the Corps website proclaims that the virtues of the new look seem to imply its very appearance will make enemies run away: “Distinctive to the Marines, the uniform is designed to inspire fear in the hearts and minds of all enemies.” But isn’t the uniform supposed to make Marines invisible?
Certainly the Army must feel, if not fear, at least irritation—as they so often do with the glory-grabbing antics of the jarheads. The Army had to settle for a version of the pixelated MARPAT scheme with the black removed. This is embarrassingly similar to the camo of the overly passive Canadian army.
The pixelation is less a result of the way the camo works than of its design and production. From a distance, the edges blur. What is revealing is that the army version of the pixelated pattern is different from the Marine one. The Army is said not to need black since its job is more general, and the theaters where it may be called on to perform are more diverse. But in Iraq the two services fight side by side.
At least the Army got pixels instead of blobs, which are so, well, Gulf War I. The old “camel-shit” pebble and boulder look of the Schwartzkopf era seems downright venerable now. The new camo is all of a style with the pixelations of video sat phones and blur-outs to protect faces and name bars. “Pixelation” is to the current run of wars what “night vision” was to Gulf War I—the stylistic keynote.
The art of camo, the camo of art
Despite its functionalist status, camo has always had style—and art. Camouflage attracts modernists raised to believe that ornament is crime. Camo ornaments legally, you might say—its pattern has a job to do. Artists and fashion designers have long played off camouflage. Many used bright fluorescent colors instead of dull natural ones. Andy Warhol’s camouflage portraits, done late in his life, employed this strategy. (One recurrent fashion joke about camouflage is the perennial camo bikini, a play on concealment and revelation.)
Camo’s history became a parable of a wider truth: that the design of even the most functional object—and camo would seem to live and die by its function—inevitably becomes artistic and stylistic. Camouflage was associated from its beginnings with art and artists. Artists were put into service in World War I to camouflage equipment and installations. Gertrude Stein famously reported the remarks of Picasso and Braque, viewing camouflaged military equipment on parade in Paris at the beginning World War I. “We did that,” Picasso said. “That is Cubism.” That may have been Cubism, which would have made the lovely lavender and pink lozenges of German Albatross fighter planes, fitted together like cells of a honeycomb, “hexagonalist.”
Dazzle ship camouflage was futurist, or vorticist, with its slashes and jags. That an apparently functionalist thing had so many stylistic and cultural variants was a lesson modernism would have to learn again and again.
Camo realism
There is realist camouflage, too, as there is realist painting. The most powerful figure in the world of camouflage may be Bill Jordan of Realtree, a camo realist. Jordan has licensed his patterns to some 800 companies. He has formed a business alliance with NASCAR, which allows him to hang out with top stock car race drivers and produces items that show leafy patterns topped with dramatically shaded race car numbers.
An athletic young man who grew up hunting and fishing for bass in Georgia, Jordan according to his website, “decided to try his hand at making a camo pattern. For hours, he sat in his parents’ front yard sketching and coloring an exact replica of the bark of a giant oak tree.” His mother still lives in the house and “the tree that started it all still stands guard over the front yard.”
Local colors
Camouflage also reflects national and regional differences. Camouflage is always specific to the area of its use, and the Realtree family is down home camo. Camo is costume appropriate to the stage and show. We speak after all of “theaters” of war. The patterns favored by hunters are extremely specific to terrain and season: winter branch or autumn leaf.
Another southern camo maker, Mossy Oak (also established in 1986 and based in Mississippi), offers a similarly sentimental account of its local origins. Mossy Oak’s original patterns, with their “realistic limbs and ghostly shadows,” (which could be a line of Wallace Stevens) were drawn by a local artist based on “a very large and special tree in South Alabama.” Mossy Oak has now been joined by one called Obsession, like a certain perfume, which Toxey Haas, the founder, developed using computer images.
Stein understood there were national styles of camouflage as well as artistic ones. “Another thing that interested us enormously,” she noted about camo, “was how different the camouflage of the French looked from the camouflage of the Germans, and then once we came across some very neat camouflage and it was American. The idea was the same, but as after all it was different nationalities who did it the difference was inevitable. The color schemes were different, the way of placing them was different, it made plain the whole theory of art and its inevitability.” The national differences of camo are evident in the German flecktarn (Fig. 1), redolent of picnics in the Alps, and the jungley tiger stripe (Fig. 2) so beloved of Central American and African dictators—think Manuel Noriega.
Future camo
The camo gurus at Hyperstealth Biotechnology Corp take a very different approach. Instead of realism, they employ the mathematics of fractals to design patterns. They might be seen as conceptualists beside the realists of Realtree or Mossy Oak.
Computers are also key to the camo patterns developed by Hyperstealth, which recently sold one of its patterns to the Kingdom of Jordan. The principals of the company, its president Guy Cramer and consultant Lt. Col. Timothy R. O’Neill, Ph.D., United States Army (Ret.), developed their patterns by running multiple fractals (graphics with feed back loops) and advanced algorithms through computers in a process they call Camouflage Designated Enhanced Fractal Geometry.
The algorithms that generate the patterns developed by Hyperstealth belong to the mathematics of emergent patterns—the stuff of evolution and fractals, very popular these days with designers. They are not just shapes abstracted from nature, but processes abstracted from nature.
Selecting from the results of this process is an activity like that of Jhane Barnes, choosing from computer-designed patterns for her fabrics. It is a reminder that because all design involves choice it inevitably also involves style.
-
these links are also helpful in getting a closer look at the uniform redesigns.
article: uniform updates
http://slate.msn.com/id/2106359 /
video: shows really good close ups/details
http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/2004/06/newacu.wmv
-cg -
Here, take a look at Multicam aswell. The army rejected it for Digital Camo, like the Marines, but Multicam blew it away in testing. It was unfortunate politics that Digitial Camo is now the standard. Just look at the pictures. Multicam is drop dead beautiful.
-
"MARPAT was developed with the help of the Canadian Department of National Defence and their extensive research used to develop CADPAT." according to this source:
http://www.hyperstealth.com/CADPAT-MARPAT.htm
as well as this month's issue of Walrus Magazine:
http://www.walrusmagazine.com
According to Walrus, it's plagiarism on the part of the US Marines: "CADPAT has now been copied by the US Marine Corps, which adapted a nearly identical pixilated design... The Marines have refused to acknowledge any Canadian influence." -
'AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.'
So perhaps you could stuff your jingoistic rot about the 'overly passive Canadian army'? i guess peacekeeping is just too passive for you lot. -
"This is embarrassingly similar to the camo of the overly passive Canadian army." While there are any number of appropriate retorts for this, I think it suffices to say it is a very poor showing. How disappointing.
-
I think the people behind MARPAT are trying to cover for the fact that they printed their camouflage and forgot to use the hi-res artwork provided by the illustrator. They really should have picked it up when they received the blue lines.
-
"This is embarrassingly similar to the camo of the overly passive Canadian army."
Andrew already told the truth about digicam ... our Canadian Cadpat was developed first and we've been running around in it before the US finally 'adopted' it.
I suggest some research before spouting off weak digs. -
I sincerely believe that camouflage is utilitarian as well as artistic. I believe the idea that different cultures and environments spawn different interpretations of camouflage lends support to this belief. People often laugh at people driving around in camouflage hunting trucks, but I have always appreciated them. I have endeavored to provide a medium to showcase the “back-yard” interpretation of camouflage as well as the camouflage that companies provide for vehicles. The web site http://www.CamoTruck.Net is provided to let people display their work. I hope this site will someday be a good archive which captures this unique perspective of the art of camouflage.
-
"The Army had to settle for a version of the pixelated MARPAT scheme with the black removed."
I don't think the Army "settled" for anything. According to some things I have read the Army purposely left out the color black because it is not a common color in nature. -
I was going to point out the chronology of CADPAT vs the reccent updates to camoflage in the US armed services. But somebody already beat me to it.
I was gong to tell the author to shove the jingoistic 'overly passive' manure back where it came from. But somebody already beat me to that too.
So, I'd just like to reenforce those comments. -
Too bad this article fails to say that a wealth of material is available now on this fascinating subject.
-
It's interesting that the Autralian Army and SAS camo is based of the localised jungle pattern, however this pattern had had it's colours altered to desert colours for operations in Iraq but the pattern remains the same. It seems to me that the pattern is a national signifier and that a set of colours in order is more important than pattern.
-
Some belated respones: The "black is not a common color in nature" explanation must strike botanists biologists and just us regular folk as pretty dubious.
Readers who doubt the NIH factor in the military need only read up on the Beetle Bailey comics....
Also, to the number of comments on the phrase":overly passive Canadian army," I refuse to believe in national stereotypes---it is not true for instance that all Canadians lack a sense of humor :) -
For all of you who feel the USMC ripped off CADPAT, I am sure you are unaware the US Army has been doing work with digital camouflage since the late 70's, which I believe makes the US Army the real first. So I think some one else should do more research before pointing fingers. I don't believe the Canadians ever stated anything about a US Army influence either.
Multicam is great and works but was never a contender for the ACU contract it was tested but is part of a seperate on going program at Natick. As such it was tested against the competitors for the ACU contract not a participating bid. You may well see Multicam issued in the future. -
I for one do no like CANPAT, way too florecent green base for me. I actually prefer MARPAT as it has the brown base more common in the forest as opposed to looking at the fringes.
Hyperstealth patterns look good in mockups, but i do not like his woodland pattern as produced for sale, base color is near white! However TigerPAT is excellent. For me base colors must match the light/medium browns/olive greens in actual forests. Tans/whites are simply unacceptable to a trained light infantry soldier who relies on stealth, silence and camo to remain unobserved.
Right now i would either choose MARPAT, if i had to pick a "digi" pattern, or more preferably i would pick a "Flecktran" pattern like German or Danish. But my heart still prefers British DPM but in a more Olive color scheme.
I currently own gear in CANPAT, MARPAT, Can OliveDrab, Can Commercial Woodland and British Soldier 95 DPM. I am next buying German Flecktarn, because Danish M84 is too expensive just yet.
I hope Hyperstealth fixes his SpecAM Alpha "woodland" camo as i really liked it in the mockup. More particularly, his SpecAM Woodland Range and SpecAM Temperate Range look pretty good to me
http://www.hyperstealth.com/specam/home/index.html -
BTW: The Russians were the first to use a digi-cam design, KLMK patterns came out in the 60's. This is no doubt where any US designs originate. By 1st past the post rules its;
1. Russians
2. Canadian
3. US USMC
4. Hyperstealth
5. US Army (suckie ACU)
6. Jordon
As for the claims of the digi pattern used to create a dithering effect....blah! there are no square lines in nature, nor little blocks. Dithering effects where best produced by one of the original makers of camoflage, the Germans, WWII Blurred Edge camo. Next are dot patterns, also German, both dating to 1940's. Digi-Cam is then just a fancy way of producing similiar designs without the tell tale signs of being of german origins. -
To Vince Doane,
You should realise that the USA did not and does not invent everything, nor does it lead the way in everything. The USA is full of Canadians doing your designs. The best known might be the famous WWII M1 Garand Rifle. It was invented by a Canadian from Quebec. The F-15 Eagle et al was invented by Canadian Engineers from the canceled Avro Arrow Project, as was the Space Shuttle.
Currently the US Marines and US Army are driving around in Canadian wheeled APC's. Your famous Cruise Missles is controled by a Canadian designed and built "brain"...and on and on i could go....
Yanks....they are taught there are only 50 States in the whole world ;) ...and they believe it...they also think they won every war they fought before Vietnam....dead wrong again...you lost the war of 1812...because Canada is still here, independent and NOT a US State! Oh that's right we are passive....just don't try anything, we are friendly...but we don't like loud mouth superiority minded idiots thinking they are all that....especially when we know they are just dumb ass yanks ;) -
What's wrong with good old madder red jackets with regimental facing colours
It's scared the bejesus out of the French, Dutch, Austrians, Americans, French again (and again) Zulu, Fuzzi Wuzzie, Indians, Irish, Spanish, Russian, Japanise, Italian, Polish, Chinese ... In fact more or less everyone except the whiley old Afgan! -
The digital camo works way better than any other style. The all terrain digital pattern is also better than the upcoming Multicam pattern.
-
The science behind digital color schemes I can explain. I am an software engineer, and infantry officer by trade and have worked with digital noise patterns.
I won't use any math but concepts in my explaination.
Here is the science behind why we use it:
In nature noise is a RANDOM process. That process means that it cannot be correlated and such tends to blend in with the surrounding environment.
IN DSP correlation is by definition:
1) A causal, complementary, parallel, or reciprocal relationship, especially a structural, functional, or qualitative correspondence between two comparable entities: a correlation between drug abuse and crime.
2) Statistics The simultaneous change in value of two numerically valued random variables: the positive correlation between cigarette smoking and the incidence of lung cancer; the negative correlation between age and normal vision.
3) An act of correlating or the condition of being correlated.
Since noise in nature cannot be correlated. There is no definable patterns in noise; so the eyes will blurs the patterns with the environment.
A good example is to goto any environment where there is alot of people. If you are not paying attention to anyone person the noise all sounds blurred together. It is only when your mind filters out other noise patterns can you hear certain sounds. Your brain is correlating certain noise patterns in your mind with what it is receiving.
This is the science behind digital noise patterns. In truth no-one can really create noise patterns but what is called psuedonoise patterns are built. Also fractal patterns are a form of pseudonoise patterns. Also is CDMA (code division multiple access), which is used in cell-phones.
That doesn't mean digital camo works better than other camo colors. The ACU in my opinion got blown away by MULTICAM in testing. See MULTICAM used random processed colors (not digital but randomly processed camo colors) to make it blend in with their environment. I was very impressed with it in dead grass and lighted areas as well as sandy and wooded areas. compared with woodland green and ACU colors.
One problem with ACU too is that I feel the people who decided on it didn't have any "common sense". They went off of the fad which at the time was digital colors and maybe got pressured because the marines had marpat. That gets people killed period.
In my opinion if the Army wanted a one color that fits all it they should have chosen MULTICAM. The real test in my opinion will be what special forces uses. Will they go ACU or will they go MULTICAM, marpat, or stick with NATOwoodland or DCU.
Let me explain the "non common sense". I heard that the Army decided against having black in their camo uniform (The ACU) becuase they were told that black isn't a color that is in nature and black has a high probability to silowhetting the soldier. Plus they were told by I think Natick research that when in close proximity, black is easily seen.
Well this is where they have it wrong. They are right in that black isn't a real color in nature. But black is a color that the mind creates when it can-not recognize a color. (You will never see a black rainbow color LOL). But take any color pattern and set it off a far distance and it will look black. Take that same color and put it in a dark area and it will turn black. In fact, how many times have you mistaken dark blue for black in everyday life. See my point. It may not be in nature but it is a color in real life. COMMON SENSE
I think that special forces will use MULTICAM in the future regardless of what the regular army has. Think of Ghost Recon.
I will be getting my own pair of MULTICAM pants and LBV for myself. Crye Precision has an excellent array of camo clothing and accessories. I think it will be excellent in my hiking personal land navigation I do on my off time. Plus it will look cool in the range.
Check my website when I get it, becuase pics will be shown. But check my website anyways. -
Hello,
I think the most effective camo's now trade are:
Multicam
British DPM
Italian San Marco.
And none is pixilated.
Marpat, flecktarn are too dark, too specific.
Walk out of a wood wearing a marpat or a flecktarn and you'll be seen. These camo are not disruptive that's why they less effective than the others.
Multicam is great because of its colors. Bazillion is right about black color (which's not a color in fact).
San Marco is pretty good because of the spray pattern, that erases edges.
As I'm french, I shouldn't have to say anything about camo, because our army's camo sucks, but remember that the first camo suits were french, invented by a painter, Eugene Corbin, during WW1. ;)
I study camouflage everyday and I work on it.
Be sure that the right colors for a camo are the colors you see as many other different.
Regarding to the shapes of the pattern, take a look at the San Marco, you'll understand what works better...
Oh, just a word for my old american friends: camo isn't made to be beautiful or to be scary for the enemy... It's made to survive. Be beautiful on a battlefield, sniper will laugh!
Best wishes to the Canucks! -
For the Canucks......
" That sample of cloth is what compelled us to try out the idea and we gave credit to it via the -PAT descriptor in MARPAT. You can read a version of the CADPAT myth here at http://www.hyperstealth.com/CADPAT-MARPAT.htm . You will also see how the ignoramus editor of the hyperstealth site is making a speculation as to how the insignia is hidden in the fabric. (*update: this has since been removed from his web site after I pointed it out to him as incorrect.) It is really interesting to hear so many rumors out there about how this "technology" was leased, borrowed, consulted etc etc. When all we did was something anyone on a home computer with Adobe Photoshop can do on their own. It has even been recently discovered that the US Army was actually the first to work with digital camo patterns in the 1970s. So while the Canadians have been trying to argue the "Chicken or the Egg" issue...it appears that the US Army is the "rooster".
Semper Fi
Ken Henley
Former Sgt, USMC" -
I don't agree that black is a common color in nature. Not pure black (RGB 0,0,0). (Sure, crows are black, but it's pretty rare that a soldier needs to hide among a flock of birds.) Most of the near-black you see in nature is created by shadow - the lack of light. But it's rarely a total lack of light in daylight hours. In the day time, shadows are going to be some percentage of the actual color, but rarely will it be 100% black (0% reflected light). Now take those same near-black colors and look at them at night with only some moonlight, *then* they'll appear totally black.
-
About ACUPAT-
While it's designed to work "okay" in any environment, it only performs "okay" in those particular environments. Sure, a soldier doesn't have to change uniforms, but once he/she sees how ineffective ACUPAT may be, they'll want to.
In urban environments, I feel that ACUPAT is effective. In woodland/temperate/jungle regions, ACUPAT is simply ineffective and a field liability. Having seen ACUPAT used in wooded regions of Texas in as dry a season as fall, it's already obvious that ACUPAT is simply too gray. Now in spring, the ACUPAT is far behind MARPAT Woodland and MultiCam in effectiveness.
It's sad to say this, but ACUPAT is a product of politics, not field research. It's an okay pattern, but when compared to the 3 variations of MARPAT, it falls horribly short except against Desert MARPAT. And against the single-pattern Multicam, ACUPAT is far less effective in all of the common regions of color.
Don't be surprised if many Army special forces operators opt for Multicam in favor of ACUPAT. -
I originally checked out this page for USEFUL info on camo. Wow, was this ever a disappointment, it seems like everyone is more concerned about who is better and who made this or that...WHO CARES!!! If it works, use it!!!
For the most part we are all on the same side, and are fighting a greater evil right now that who designed digicam...
I was looking for reviews on MULTICAM, and havent heard any negative feedback from anywhere yet...
Anyone got any comments on MULTICAM...useful comments...I couldent give 2 shits who first designed it!! -
Hello All, I’m very interested in the process used in deciding the size of the pixels in the digital patterns. It seems that a larger 3” pixel would have helped at longer ranges 40 meters and further. The digital patterns I have seen at 40meters (in the open, when concealment is needed most) tend to look a solid color. I would love to see multicam with no black and larger “Blobs” anyway just thinking aloud. Well Have a good one no matter how mature your culture is lol .
Ps I think blobs may be better just because nature is not digital it is analog. -
Multicam does not in fact contain black, the color you are seeing is a washed out and faded dark sienna brown...I thought it was black as well until I purchased a pair of Multicam pants...
-
The article's example of Flecktarn (fig.4) is incorrect. That looks like MARPAT in the picture. Here are correct examples of Flecktarn:
http://www.strikeball.com/equip.shtml
From a distance, I find Flecktarn and MARPAT very similar looking (as evidenced by the mistaken picture in fig 4). And similarly effective and superior to woodland and even.
Aetheically, as a designer, I like love the graphic style of Flecktarn but from a practical side, it's too dark and works better in the woods after it's faded a bit (my experience playing airsoft or paintball). The dithering effect of the splattered dots is more effective in blending in with the environment than BDU Woodland.
Those who think 'digital' camo is ineffective because the squares are obvious are looking at it too closely and missing the point.
You need to judge a camo by it's visual effectiveness at the inteded engagement distance. The bad guys are either going to see you or not see you when they're within weapon range (ie 100yrds-1000yrds). These are the distances that you need your camo to 'blend' in.
The square shapes in CADPAT, ACUPAT, MARPAT, etc. can't be seen clearly at these distances with the human eye. So whether they are square, triangular or round, doesn't make much difference.
But at close quarters it's important to have a unique pattern because when a body comes round the corner from a nearby building or cover, you want to be able to identify them as friend or foe. This was the real problem of woodland for the US armed forces was that,the 'bad guys' bought knockoff patternd pants from Pakistan or China factories and they look like us
Osama Bin Ladin wore a BDU woodland field jacket for goodness sakes!
Of course I'm already starting to see knock off ACUPAT and MARPAT so the eventually we'll see the similar problem resourface when every other army in the world wears practically the same uniofrm. -
Since we got different points of view here ill add one more:
Im a Member of an Austrian Airsoft team (dont laugh) and we got training games and matches nearly every weekend. In different locations and theatres. Since 2000 we used and prefeered Propper RAID 1 or 2 BDU is Woodland Cloth or 3 Col Desert. which worked well. Sometimes even the old OVTS (Original Vietnam Tiger Stripe) pattern, which had a good Camo in wodded areas. in 2005 We decided to Swap for Multicam as main BDU. and maybe ACU as reserve for URBAN areas.
Now we made the Change:
We use Multicam in most Areas, but mostly in desert like areas or in Fall or Spring.
http://images.lasc.at/details.php?image_id=457&sessionid=e36e5a0e1c967d04703adbb956261707
(first man wears MultiCam the other wear dif types of camo)
http://images.lasc.at/details.php?image_id=474&sessionid=e36e5a0e1c967d04703adbb956261707
For a full Wood we still use Woodland, and the only good thoing about the ACUpat to say is.. they accidently invented the best URBAN camo ever.. thats the only good thing 'bout ACU.
Dont choose ur BDU from what it looks like or who invented it.. choose it which best conceals u.
BUT if u really wanna just use one BDU.. go for Multicam.
u dont need to have the Cyre Precision uniform other manufactures have good Multicam BDUs or RAIDs aswell..
Greetings frm Austria.
Nightbringer
(some pics of my team wearing oldschool camo)
http://images.lasc.at/categories.php?cat_id=17&sessionid=e36e5a0e1c967d04703adbb956261707 -
I'm surprised that with all of us Canadians in here nobody actually knows the real story of CADPAT vs. MARPAT etc. because it's not that hard to find.
There is a company based in British Columbia that designed CADPAT, MARPAT and the new disruptive pattern camoflage for the Jordanians.
The digi-camo disruptive imagery camoflage was designed using a correlation of color groupings in thousands of natural images using gassian blur which is a very old concept. The company in BC was the first company to utilize the technology in camoflage.
The Canadians were the first to deploy it, and given the reaction to Canadian forces deployed as part of NATO in Afghanistan (after a very embarassing episode of Canadian forces wearing woodland in arid afghanistan, covering themselves in blankets and smocks) everyone took notice.
It was this that inspired the USMC to purchase a design to their own specifications from same company, and the Jordanians are buying in.
Other digital camoflage designs are mere prototypes and are not widely deployed in a national force, or knock off fabrics shipped out of China, Mexico and other nations but are not real disruptive pattern camoflage.
The pattern the USMC uses does not contain a watermark because the idea of disruptive pattern is that there is no pattern tto the real bona fide fabric, reducing the chance that a still soldier in adequate cover will be seen.
Get a grip! -
Since there is a lot of confusion and speculation about origins of digital camouflage, I decided to weigh in. (I don't usually post on these sites, but the correspondents here seem to be interested in actually learning things rather than just throwing spitballs.)
I'm the guy cited on the origins of digital camouflage. This in fact did happen in the mid-70's. (The Soviet jagged-edge pattern was for a different purpose.) I developed what came to be called Dual-Tex in 1974 while at the University of North Carolina preparing for an assignment as a West Point instructor. There were several reasons for doing it, but they are explanations from visual psychophysics and not of much interest here (and they did not in fact have anything to do with dithering). The basic reason involved matching the texture components of natural backgrounds and creating a pattern that would decompose into finer patterns as the observer came closer to the target. In the decades since there have been major changes and refinements that address other visual processes. The current versions now being tested combine background match with disruption of critical geometries of the human form and movement.
In 1976, members of the psychology committee in the Office of Military Leadership (now West Point's Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership) chipped in $20 each to buy film and materials and tested the concept in lab and field. We probably ran the cheapest R&D program in the annals of the Defense Department. The results were so encouraging that the Army R&D community took over. Around 1980 the decision was made to go to a standard NATO pattern for vehicles (Dual-Tex application was very complicated and time-consuming then).
The "digital" concept (a term I dislike, since it does not address the reason for the design) wandered around for about 20 years while I shifted my research to other related areas (by this time I was a member of the permanent faculty at West Point); in the process the look and feel got separated from the scientific rationale and started over as a fashion statement. I have no idea whether the CADPAT was influenced by Dual-Tex -- the concept was floating around NATO concept papers for years and it might have morphed from that, or it might well have been an independent discovery. If so, good for the Canadians!
This furor moved me back into camouflage research (I retired from the Army in 1991 and had been doing counterterror training in the Arab Emirates just before teaming up with the Marines during the MARPAT development) in the early 2000's and am still doing it, commuting back to West Point for research projects for the Marines and Army, serving foreign clients, and generally having a good time and making money -- the American dream.
You will now see digital-style patterns in most US outfits and various foreigh countries; most recently, a fractal-style pattern for snow overwhites and camouflage for infantry weapons. Our work is expanding into true urban patterns and advanced development and evaluation techniques. I was not involved in the US Army pattern development now on the ACU.
Anyway, that's the five-cent tour.
Tim O'Neill -
great blog, is there a chance I can get the Pantone Reference for Nato Camouflage colors?
I want to paint a jeep with those colors and I donnt want to use a wrong green. please send email to luis.nogueira@webtools.pt , thanks! -
I think it is a good idea using fractal equations to pump out color and shape schemes for camouflage. If anyone spends anytime out of doors looking at the overall pattern to rocks trees sand snowflakes, anything, you can see that no matter the colors, the basic shapes follow the principles of fractals.
anything NOT following that pattern tends to stand out visually. -
So, is Multicam actually being used by any branch of the military? I know that Natick was using it in their Future Force Warrior program, but I just read that they're scrapping that from their 2008 budget. Does that mean that Multicam is no longer affiliated with any military?
-
Additionally, the patterns, with their quarter inch shapes are readable from space based surveillance and can contain messages incorporated into the pattern that are unknown to the wearer.
A positive use of this is to limit engagement of "friendly" personnel.
It also furthers the autonomous war fighting goals of DARPA by allowing sensors on unmanned warriors to identify friend and foe. -
Might add that the expressing "digital" applied to new camouflage designs sort of annoys me, since it suggests a fashion statement rather than a systematic design principle. Here's the story on the pixel design:
In 1976, during my first year on the West point faculty and just out of a grad school tour that involved vision science, I convinced my pals on the general psychology committee to help out on a study of advanced camouflage design that eventually produced the "digital" expression. We chipped in to the tune of about $100 and did a lab test at west point and a field test at Aberdeen Proving ground (and later at Fort Irwin, CA).
The first aplication (Dual-Tex) was for vehicles, and we needed to match the spatial texture of natural backgrounds. The easiest way to do this was with some kind of picture element (pixel) that matched the basic texture (optical elements, or "optels") of the background. To do this, we hand-painted the design on an engineless armored personnel carrier with a 2" paint roller. Result: little squares!
The pixels can be any shape as long as they are the right size; for obvious reasons, though, the squares are easier to design by computer.
Correctly designed "digital" applications (there aren't many) have what is called a macropattern that disrupts the target shape and a micropattern that matches background texture. The fractal decomposition of a Mandelbrot series does this pretty well (though there are proprietary tricks involved).
This approach is now in use or being developed for various dervices and armies, as well as for the US Bureau of Land Management (to hide manmade eyesores spoiling scenic views on public lands) and by some cell phone companies to make relay towers less conspicuous. -
Okay for everyone wondering if MultiCam is being used in the US forces... it is. Here in Canada there is this show on Discovery called daily planet. Basicly they go over new technologies, and just about everything science. Anyways I was watching it the other day, and they were doing a story on the US Army's bridge tank. It basicly has a folded up bridge on top that can be extended over a creak. Well those US Army egineers were all wearing MultiCam. FORESURE. I actually just purchased a MultiCam Jacket the other day made by propor. It seems to work better than any digital. The day I got it I had a few beers at the bar, went home and I swear by staring at MultiCam I felt like I was going to vomit. lol Even now sober if I stare at it too long I get queezy :P And to everyone arguing about who made digi first.. who cares. I'm Canadian myself and if the Marines got the design from us GOOD. Or like wise, we're allies if one of us finds a pattern that works, it should be shared with no money involved. If it saves lives who cares who got it from who! But anyways yeah US Army engineers are wearing multicam. Maybe not all, but the ones who worked that bridge tank WERE wearing it.
-
yall seriously need to stop complaining about who created the whole "digital" concept. it doesnt matter who created it first. if the us army was the first to come up with it ,ok but if it was canada, thats fine too. what matters is what ever works, should be used. Its not like the US and Canada are enemies; we should be able to freely exchange ideas and improve on them. i personally think they both work well, and we should combine teams to develop a pattern even better than the digital ones using both nation's experience. however, i think multicam works well in that field though,so if you want to complain about the digitals, you're wasting your time
-
Im looking for someone who can help me chang my wedding dress from white and wine to white and camo. I know it sounds funny but im going with somthing different. The makers of wedding dresses at David's Bridal wont make the dress the way I want it.SO PLEASE HELP!
-
for Mindy, We WILL either make your gown custom to your measurements and with camo where ever you want it, OR take a pre purchased dress and add camo to it. We are using Mossy Oak and Tru Timber as they are the only ones that are being made in satin. We don't have military camos like being discussed here though. Our new gown line is called: " A Touch of Camo" JoAnne
-
Great comments, everyone. Shame the article that prompted this debate wasn't a little better researched from the technical (as opposed to art history) point of view. For example: "Only Marines can wear the new MARPAT pattern". Several countries have purchased MARPAT for their armed forces (albeit without the Marine's little Eagle, Globe & Anchor motif in the pattern), and some others wear patterns that have the colours transposed, but are otherwise identical. The article says that, unlike the US Marines, the "Army is said not to need black since its job is more general, and the theaters where it may be called on to perform are more diverse. But in Iraq the two services fight side by side", implying that the Marines wear their green, brown and black woodland MARPAT uniforms there, when in fact the USMC issues a desert coloured version for deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. The desert uniform, of course, uses no black.
Well done Professor O'Neill for wading in too! It's seldom one sees the subjects of the stories in the media speaking for themselves.
Mindy, I sure hope your wedding dress came off alright. Hmmm... THAT didn't come out right!
Dom
www.hydedefinition.com
digital camo designs for the 21st century -
The related images do not really relate.
German flecktarn (Fig. 1), is actually MARPAT (a copy from Mil-Tec I believe).
Camouflage Correlation
I give patterns a score out of ten for overall effectiveness. Then I give a percentage score for how effective it is in the intended environment, so an exact match, which would be a photo against where the photo was taken would be 100%, and ineffective patterns would be about 30%. DPM’s and US Woodland’s overall score is about 8/10, the percentage score being between about 50% to 90% depending on the variation and exact situation in the intended environment. But some patterns overall score would be low like with hunting patterns, eg, Trebark and Realtree/Advantage, which is about 5/10 for Trebark and 6/10 for most Realtree/Advantage patterns, but the percentage score being between 85% to 98% in the intended environment.
As a reference point Hi viz like Saturn Yellow and Blaze Orange should score 0% because they are intended to stand out, however in certain situations, for example, Saturn Yellow blends in during the spring where sunlight shines through the bright green leaves in which case would score 50%. Camouflage colours like Olive Drab score around 60% to 90% depending on the actual shade of Olive Drab and the situation.
In 1991 I started to develop a theory which I called Camouflage Correlation (or could even be a coefficient), it is a correlation between the camouflage pattern and its effectiveness. As I stated before each pattern has a different effectiveness and this effects survivability. Basically you can express the survivability of trained soldiers as a percentage based on the Camouflage Correlation of the pattern they are wearing, for example if they were wearing an ineffective pattern the percentage would be lower and if they are wearing an effective pattern the percentage would be higher. However training soldiers to be aware of the pattern they are wearing, like trying to keep to places where it blends in, and adding scrim/foliage would increase survivability.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Comments