Digital camo

>>32080035
Its only advantage is that it is slightly cheaper to mass produce for some reason (seriously); this is why it has become widely adopted by militaries worldwide -- either due to cost-consciousness (budget dictates military expenditures) or peer pressure (everyone else is doing it).
It has no practical advantage over "traditional" camouflage; in fact, it's slightly less effective.

>>32080091
>it's slightly less effective
No. It's the same. People would be hard pressed to distinguish which patterns are pixelated or not beyond 10 yards. I challenge you to provide evidence that speaks to the contrary,

File: 245452433454.jpg (425KB, 1300x886px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 1300x886px

>>32080035
At one time, pixelated patterns provided a small measure of advantage over traditional ones because they integrated micropatterns. The vast majority of 20th century standardized patterns used large intersecting amoebas of contrasting colors (macropatterns). At closer distances and really just in general, these are not as effective as patterns with smaller micropatterns inlaid.

This advantage is moot however, as traditional, non-pixelated, amoeba patterns typically integrate micropatterns in the modern era. MultiCam is an example of this.

File: 337515819db66dff0c.jpg (596KB, 938x912px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 938x912px

>>32080035
At least the Finnish M05 camo was generated using thousands of photographs taken of the country's environments, processed into patterns and colors that'd match those images the best. The results have been often very impressive.

File: 1369187116308.jpg (121KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1024x680px

>>32080035
It works better, CADPAT is a perfect example. It's damn near invisible at times.

>>32080105
>slightly

>>32080728
Dude, it's...the fucking same. Saying slightly doesn't change the fact that you're implying regular camos are somehow better. They aren't.

>>32080706
>>32080437
When you get into these, though, you run into the issue that they're perfectly suited for defending a known location with known terrain features, but when you have an expeditionary/offensive army, it's much, much more difficult to predict exactly what you'll be working with. hence the clusterfuck that was UCP.

>>32080728
but it is NOT slighty less effective

File: 05 desert camo + RK95TP.jpg (1000KB, 4222x2815px) Image search: [Google]

1000KB, 4222x2815px

>>32081134
Instead of trying to create a mediocre jack-of-all-trades camo, you could just create different camo patterns for different environments.

File: partizan_jacket_pants.jpg (98KB, 269x480px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 269x480px

>>32081134
That just shows that universal camo patterns are retarded.

I like the old soviet approach of the camouflage smock:
Make a light, cheap set of baggy ass overalls that is worn over the actual uniform. Because they're so simple they can always be made to suit the AO. Definitely cheaper and more effective than making a shitty set of "universal" camo uniforms only to replace them when you realize how fucking awful the pattern is.

File: suora.jpg (71KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x640px

>>32080091
>>32080728
The camouflage is supposed to work best at the range of engagement. You should see the targets only good enough to confirm it's not a friendly. If you can see the target he will soon see you. At those distances your target shouldn't be more than a big moving dot. You're dead if you can tell if your enemy is wearing digital camo or traditional.

>>32080437
It's a good camo, I liked it. I/15.

File: 3452353453.jpg (1MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1600px

>>32081161
Or you could invest into an excellent jack of all trades camo.

>>32081192
>any "jack of all trades" camo
>excellent
lol

File: 28815540[1].jpg (71KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x480px

>>32081200
What? ALL camouflage is designed to work in environments ranging from arid to tropic. The the very nature of transitional patterns falling into the middle of this range, means they would have to be a jack of all trades, master of some. Taking a woodland or desert pattern into a transitional environment is retarded when multicam, multiland, arid fleck, or some other transitional pattern is literally designed for that environment. Yes, transitional patterns are in fact excellent in transitional environments.

>>32080143
Mexican digital is bretty nice

File: SAF transitional.jpg (102KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 800x600px

>>32080035
When Singapore wanted to modernise their Vietnam-era ERDL camo in 2008, then went with something that was god-tier in the jungle, but absolutely shitty everywhere else.

File: SAF Camo Transition.jpg (637KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 800x531px

>>32081274
Pic related

>>32081161
>>32081200
What the hell is with this "multi-environment" patterns aren't good camo meme?

>>32081292
It comes from people who just really don't understand much at all about camouflage.

>>32080035
Because I haven't seen anyone actually say this.

Digi camo exists cause the way your eye works at different distances.
Big blobby camo, like the old woodland, works great at a distance. But detailed, sharper camo like hunters camo works better up close. The hunters camo at a distance though, kind of blurs, and you look like one big blob. With a very human looking outline. Also it tends to be super specific to one area.

The advantage of Digi, is that up close, you have the sharp lines, and at any distances, they blur so it looks closer to the older styles.

Saying the camo is slightly less effective is simply untrue. Overall, it is better.

>>32081274
>>32081278
>then went with something that was god-tier in the jungle, but absolutely shitty everywhere else.
Well given their location and reason for being, it makes a lot of sense...

File: acu fail in Finland.jpg (455KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1400x933px

>>32081292
it's a simple proven fact.

"Good enough" everywhere < Great at intended environments.

File: 14884719_672903926220136_4066246844937403665_o.jpg (244KB, 1600x986px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1600x986px

>>32080437
M05 is probably the most awesome pattern and colour palette out there today.

The size and shapes and the properly contrasting colours which are a fan-fucking-tastic match to the intended environment really work wonders. The charcoal black and flat and dull grayish brown are sweet AF.

My guess is that the FDF can hang on to it until the climate changes and there´s jungles growing in Finland too. I really don´t see how it could be any better at all.

>>32081274
>>32081278
Anywhere i can get the new one in surplus ? Been to singapore this summer and saw allot of conscripts ( i think they wer in their twenties )

File: 21321212.jpg (57KB, 690x525px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 690x525px

>>32081703
First of all, UCP is not an example of a transitional camouflage pattern. UCP was not developed for any region and was not actually tested at all before its adoption.

Second of all, transitional patterns are not only "good enough" everywhere. They are also the best camouflage for semi-arid and sparsely vegetated environments. Woodland and desert patterns are made for environmental extremes, which limits their effective use to certain conditions. The camouflage demands of a given region can vary immensely due to changes in latitude, elevation, weather, season, etc., etc. Transitional patterns don't just do a 'mediocre' job in all environments. They do the best job in some, well in many, and poorly in few. Environment specific camouflage on the other hand, does the best in some and poorly in many.

There is an environmental spectrum that you are not fundamentally aware of which suggests a very limited understanding of camouflage.

>>32080706
That guy's helmet band is too high and it's bothering me.

>>32082053
Whoa, whoa, whoa, UCP wasn't even tested before they fielded it? They just cobbled it together and said "yup, this should work"?

>>32083323
Actually yes.

>>32083323
It's one of the most retarded things of our time, read all about it here: http://www.hyperstealth.com/camo-improvement/

>>32082011
Ask the locals about an "army market" on Beach Road. Damn near any kind of issued gear is sold there, from surplus uniforms to entire plate carriers.

>>32083428
>>32082053

> Hundreds, if not thousands of soldiers might still be alive if their shitty untested camouflage hadn't given away their position to the enemy

> "Nuclear" plays faintly in the distance

File: IMG_1102.jpg (28KB, 472x260px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 472x260px

I had woodland and dcu when I went in. Got ACU in Kuwait RFI. My first thought was what is this shit?

>>32081703
this picture proves that UCP is shit

>>32084160
I feel like it's only possible utility (besides lunar camo) would be urban environments where looking like a grey blob would help you blend in with concrete structures

>>32084287
it actually isn't half bad during winter time against trees, particularly birch. Also can be okay in certain alpine terrains, particularly when above the target.

still pretty shit though

>>32080091
You say it is less effective now, but wait until your assistance is in front of a giant fuzzy screen. You will wish you had digital camo.

File: 511 woodland.png (259KB, 394x393px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 394x393px

While we're on the topic, does anyone know whatever happened to 5.11's woodland camo products (pic related)? I can only find a few listings on third-party sites for the pants and none for the tops, was it discontinued?

>>32081161
or you can leave your mom's basement every once in a while and realize how expensive and not to mention logistically impossible that would be

>>32082071
Have you ever worn one? They go all over the place and the only thing that holds them down are the nvg mount and if your cover has goggle straps they help too. Otherwise they float all over.

>>32085224
You know at one point the whole US military was using UCP, Multicam, Woodland, 3 Color Desert, MARPAT Woodland, MARPAT Desert, MARPAT Arctic, NWU, AOR I, AOR II, and ABU at the same time?
In the 90's we had woodland, 3 color desert and 6 color desert.
The Chinese are using like 8 patterns at the same time right now.
If the US army alone can blow $5bil on a piece of shit failure like UCP then we can definitely issue at the very least a woodland and desert pattern.