WW1 experimental camouflage sniper's suit using the concept of "dazzle." Dazzle camouflage, also known as razzle dazzle (in the U.S.) or dazzle painting, was a family of ship camouflage used extensively in World War I.
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
175 points (98.9% liked)
HistoryPorn
4918 readers
69 users here now
If you would like to become a mod in this community, kindly PM the mod.
Relive the Past in Jaw-Dropping Detail!
HistoryPorn is for photographs (or, if it can be found, film) of the past, recent or distant! Give us a little snapshot of history!
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
- No genocide or atrocity denialism.
Pictures of old artifacts and museum pieces should go to History Artifacts
Illustrations and paintings should go to History Drawings
Related Communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Camouflage is weird and there are some unintuative ways to do it.
-Blend in: classic camouflage
-Breaking up your silhouette: Can actually be aided by bright colours, bad once spotted but makes you harder to spot initially because you don't look like the shape the other persons brain is trying to recognize.
-Fake silhouette: Blend in part of your silhouette while making a deliberately visible fake silhouette of something else inside it, similar to the above making the other person skip over you by messing with the brains pattern recognition.
-Pixel weirdness: I don't know the details on this one but at certain scales/distances an inconsistent but very distinctly geometric pattern can make you very hard to spot because our brains don't innately associate that kind of pattern with either people or the environment and for some reason tend to react by filtering it out entierly.
Pixels, as is my understanding are simply a convenient way to design and produce camouflage with good macro/micro patterning.
Macro/micro patterning are basically the differences in distance the camo best works at. Classic US Woodland for example is a very “macro” pattern by design. It works better further away in a fairly wide variance of terrains because the shapes are very large which breaks up the human shape. Micro patterning would be an extremely dense pattern made up entirely of smaller shapes. This is great for close distance, but at longer ranges creates a “blobbing” problem where the pattern is perceived as one color essentially.
Pixelized patterns can create layers where you have a macro shape, and then inside the micro is enough variation to break it up for micro distances without losing the macro visibility.
You don’t actually need pixels to do this, but it’s become common especially with many patterns building off of early widely adopted designs.
There’s, uh, a lot more but I lost what the point of this comment was.