I've been looking at different camo patterns lately on the Internet. Hunting camo tends to be more realistic while the military camo is all over the place in terms of either realism or disruption.

Which brings to mind the question: what are the considerations that go into designing a camo that fool the human eye (military) versus one that is meant to fool an animal (hunting)? Is the military camo meant to work in more terrains like the new Army ACU camo?

John

Military camo is designed to sell to the military so that defense contractors who have contributed heavily to certain politicians on key defense committees can pay back their debts and said defense contractors can make a lot of money. Day-Desert and Woodland Camo-what a friggin' joke. Give me a pair of old VN era Jungle utilities any day.

Military cammo had been lacking for a long time. The new USMC digital is a good try.
Of course the hunter gets to decide on the pattern vs terrain.

It shore do look purty anyways.

Well, I don't think camo patterns matter very much. Howard Hill wore a checked shirt and khaki pants and slew any number of animals.

So, whatever your choice, it's fine. I wear "woodlands" camo because it's cheap.

Around here the military wear a strange camo pattern the purpose being to be harder to detect with technology such as infrared, night vision, ultra-violet, etc. I don't know how well it works but most of the troops seem to like it.

As to hunting camo just good earth tone plaids work without the washing brighteners in the soap. When I was a kid every hunter wore black and red plaid hunting outfits and that seem to work just fine. I don't think all these fancy camo outfits are really all that necessary after all the animals don't have high tech gadgets to see humans.

And you know this military/defense contractor conspiracy because of why? I've seen the tests done of the various mil. camo. came in with cotton OD's left with the early developement of the digitals. The digital type pattern isn't new there was a green with black tiny squares that was a part of the early desert camo. It was a part of an overcoat system that was tested in the Sinai years ago.

The desert pattern was a hurry up and produce it, the first units that got it during DS were those who went first, many didn't have it at first, they had to wait on production. You have to remember the cold war had just ended when DS started, everything was centered on the forested areas of central Europe. I don't know your mil. background or experience, but mine is Ret. after 25, 20 RA, 5 NG, 47YOA.

There's more to this selection and testing then drawing straws. As one man stated the military has a large area of the world to consider, so you have to have minimum types of camo. to suit your needs. It's too much of a logistical nightmare to have a multiple variety of camo.

I noticed on a recent trip to Ft. Bragg that the multi-cam uniform is being tested by some SF units. It uses a lighter and smaller version of the old BDU (woodland) pattern, cut on the ACU design. I think I might try some this season. I have been using old BDU's for years - still have about 5 sets left in my footlocker.

http://www.cryeprecision.com/view_catalog.asp

When the woodland camo BDU's hit our overseas forces in the early-mid 80's it was a godsend. There was no comparison between it and the old olive drab uni's in every facet. When it was finally announced in late 1986 that USAFE was switching over as well, a bunch of us ran over to Army posts to buy BDU's and sewed the stripes and name tags on ourselves instead of waiting for supply to get stocked.
I made a living in photo recce overseas, trust me the BDU's work/worked. They breakup your figure in hardwoods and if washed properly, they cut IR signature to some degree.

I use a lot of the commercial patterns because they can be matched to exact terrain/foliage but the woodland was a decent all around camo.

I will say that I think the Tiger stripe is superior but that's from hunting in Florida where the foliage matches asia more than temperate hardwoods.

I think you have to differentiate between military camo, designed to defeat ultra-violent and human eyes and hunting cammo, which is to disperse a pattern for deer who are colorblind.

Two different missions, and there is literally, no comparison. The different patterns are to attrac buyers, not to confuse ungulates.

True to a degree. Since most have to wear orange over it anyways, camo is more for the hunter to feel like he is blending than anything else. Any breakup pattern though is better than a solid IMO.

I may be showing my age, but I like the old style camo that could be used to harass the EM's by playing "brownside/greenside" all week long :-)

So. Idaho is HOT and dry during our Sept bow season. I wear a tan plaid sports shirt made of cotton/poly. It's the coolest thing I can find for a dry climate and it blends in as well as most camo patterns.

Dick

I don't have to remember it, 'cause I do remember it. I didn't say anything about a conspiracy, per-se. It's all about the dollar.

I don't know much about the very latest military camo-like I said it looks good...

Back in the day, a study was done of the visibility of various camo patterns. Up close, the old Tiger Stripe was best. From a distance, it all blended together, making black just as good as any of the patterns.

My concern with the contracts is where is the cutting/sewing taking place? Are the mil. camo being cut/sewn in the US or is it being done overseas? I've seen alot of sewing plants shut down due to lack of contracts etc. and the work being done overseas. These plants had done mil. work in the past.

I agree. Most commercial camo is designed to appeal to buyers, not to actually work as camo. Look at how many different versions of mossy oak and realtree camo there are, and there isn't a bit of difference realistically speaking amongst any of them. Most commercial camo is far too detailed and busy to actually work. The more effective camo styles are the larger patterns like the old woodland style, not the really busy stuff like mossy oak break up. The smaller the detail the more the eye focuses on the larger outline of the human body, from 50 yds away all you see is a grey blob shaped like a human. Camo patterns with larger features will fool the eye into not recognizing the larger outline of the human body, which is what we're trying to conceal. The vast majority of commercial camo is useless, but it looks nicer when you're wearing it to cabela's than the military stuff, which is what 95% of hunters care about anyway. It really is kind of pointless to wear camo clothing and then stick a big orange vest on top of it.

If I wear camo at all, its usually the Woodland pattern from years back. I have it in stock, did not cost anything to start with, and the deer don't seem to mind.
More often than not, I am wearing brown slacks, a green shirt, and a plaid shirt over that.

I know a retired SF soldier who participated in a camouflage test at Ft. Bragg in the '90s.

They dressed several dozen soldiers in every U.S. and foreign military and commercial pattern they could find, and had them hide in a piney area and move forward a small distance at a time. Observers watched for them and "tagged" them when seen as they moved closer to the edge of the tree line.

The general statement he made was that the commercial patterns were the worst across the board, because they were too dark and too small a pattern. All of them looked like black blobs.

The US woodland pattern had a similar problem because there's a lot of black in the pattern and not much contrast.

Surprisingly, the best performer was the old US desert camo, which had a big pattern and a lot of contrast between the darkest and lightest tones.

I think the new Army ACU pattern is effective. I drive past an ARNG facility on the way to work and see a lot of the soldiers walking from their cars. The pattern seems to blend pretty well into both shrubbery and concrete walls.

I bought a set of Multi-Cam BDU's from Sportman's Guide. With the buyer's club discount, they were about the cheapest around.

From what I remember reading about Multi-Cam, it was originally developed by the Army at their Natick Research Labs as a replacement for woodland camo. They ended up going with the new ACU and not Multi-Cam. I have seen lots of photo studies (amateur)comparing it to woodland, ACU, etc and it seems to fit in most everywhere.

John

John,
Now that you have been using the multi-cam what do you think? It looked like a good all around choice for eastern NC in fall and spring. I think I will pick up a pair of the pants on my next trip to Fayetteville (the jackets have all the velcro for military patches, not sure I need that on mine).
Odessa

The new digital, is, IMHO, a step back for humans... I saw it first year out and it also turns into a blob further out. The old desert or asat type has been best to my eyes... it doesn't blob up at distance.. and still works up close.

As to animals, they smell you or see movement.... there are so many solid color blobs in the woods when you go to looking, its not even funny. I have a hard time getting away from camo because of years of bowhunting and being convinced by the mag articles I had to have it... but reality is showing that you sit still or don't move while they are looking, and keep the wind in your face, you'll be fine...that being said... if you move at the wrong time in camo you are still busted....

For whatever reason though, good hunting clothing comes in camo a lot of times... I still haev it and buy it but lately am caught more often in tan or green pants and a different solid color shirt, red, blue, etc..... to at least break top from bottom... Haven't been spotted yet while doing it right, when doing it wrong, the last bull that pegged my wife and I, well he stood there at about 80 yards for probably 2 minutes before walking up the hill, me cussing cause I had a cow tag...

Jeff

I haven't used it in the field yet as I just got it a couple of weeks ago. However, the set I got was Tru Spec by Atlantco. I think it is well made. I think it would work anywhere in NC. I'm in the mountains and I think the mix of browns, tans, greens on a faded olive background would work well in the fall with dry and dying vegetation. I could also see it working well out West in places where you'd use Ghost Prairie or something like that.

John

always amazes me how "invisible" i can be come in a green t-shirt, blue jeans and a blaze orange vest when sitting against a drab grey gumbo hillside so long as i sit still........have had mule deer sit and stare at my patch of hillside and not actually see me at under 100 yards.....

That sums up my feeling about Camo.
It's not us humans who decide what camo is best, it's the Deer (If that's what we're hunting).
The answer to the question is, the guy who remains motionless is the guy wearing the best camo.. International Orange...
My personal camo likes aren't up for grabs when it comes to Deer hunting; I must wear Orange, in Michigan.

Don

Yup, you are hunting animals not humans (at least I hope you are not hunting humans) forget the military camo it's not necessary.

You need to do two things well three things actually: 1. Wear something to block human scent. 2. DO NOT USE COMMERCIAL LAUNDRY SOAPS. These soaps have ultraviolet brighteners in it to make your whites white and your colors brighter. Instead use laundry soap that is made for hunting clothes that does not have brighteners in it. Animals see in ultraviolet light and you look to them as a bright blue neon sign. 3. Kill the motion and make sure you do not have bright and shinny things on you.

Do this and you will not need military camo that won't help you much anyways. Of course those of us who have to wear ultra bright blaze orange well there is not much help for us.

and i have never used anything but regular laundry soap and rarely have issues, atleast that i could say was the detergent and not some stupid move on my part.......course im using a rifle and dont HAVE to get within 30 yards or so.......i have camo clothes, because in my day to day life i dont wear long sleeve shirts and i occasionally like them for layering while out hunting (weather changes constantly out here, 20 or 30 degrees when yah start hunting and might be 65 by 2 in the afternoon) so the long sleeved shirts i have happened to pick up have been camo just cause i thought of picking one up when i saw the shirt.....think ive got a prairie ghost and a predator camo one.

That's all true, but I still like to wear the new desert digital camo when predator hunting. It is my second-best camo (after my ghillie suit), IMO. Even if the camo feature isn't needed or useful, milgarb is TOUGH stuff and seems to wear forever.

But if I didn't have it, I'd be about as well off in a set of Carhart or Dickies canvas wear, to be honest. Not to mention Filson. Those are also tough and long-lasting.

I hunted with a guy who worked construction, and he wore the same clothes to hunt coyotes that he worked in. His Carhart pants and jacket were stained with paint, tar, concrete and who knows what all - and he was all but invisible when snuggled up against a dry sage bush. To the coyotes, he probably reeked to high heaven, too. But if he watched the wind and stayed still, he shot a ton of them anyway.

I'm not totally sold on the UV thing, yet I try to wash my bowhunting clothes with said wash.....

I also take my orange vest and cap out and hang it in a tree for a few weeks/months when new to get that really strong look off it.... its still way orange enough for folks to see but doesn't have taht "shine". I also am somewhat anal about my orange cap, I try to have one with a logo or something on it to break it up just a bit, and often put some pin on leave clumps in 1-2 places on my vest, not that the orange is bad, its just it needs a bit of break up to it. The cap part is just anal since its the first thing over a ridge etc..... probably doesn't make a hill of beans difference....

Jeff

I like the military pants better than anything I have found. Not necessarily because of the camo pattern but because they just seem to be of better quality than any hunting pants I have tried.

I have always felt they should have taken the old woodland camo and offered the same thing with a lot more brown and less green. The new multi-cam seems a lot like what I have thought would be perfect for years.

I've always thought that the perfect hunting camo would be in Carhart tan, with just a few swipes of black and gray primer spray-painted on it. Not a lot, just a large "K" or "Y" shape in each color here and there to confuse your shape.

As to ability of pants... I'm more convinced on some hunts, that my UV resistant nylon fishing pants are great, they have been tough enough so far, dry quickly, allow me to unzip the fly and knee seams to vent heat or totally go to shorts, and back again...

Now granted I've not run through heavy brush much yet, but for BDU weights I can carry 2-3 nylon pants....

Rocky, yep I lean way towards tans over anything else, green is generally just too dark unless you are standign in a cedar.....

of course you've described ASAT to a t, and its other iterations that end up showing green camo may have worked in places, but in hunting here in the US it generally does not, save maybe spring turkey season.

Jeff

Washing in UV free detergent and working on eliminating smell are indeed keys. I wind up with camo--most of it mismatched--because I am much more interested in the other features of the garment. Our here in SW Oregon, some kind of waterproof/breatheable fabric is very nice. My last set of pants were camo, but I bought them becasue the were a very low knapp suede, waterproof/breathable, had side cargo pockets, and the other pockets zipped.

Used to be federal prisoners made mil. uniforms while wearing
the old ones.
May not be that way now.

Aaaargh.... say it ain't so!!!

Makes sense of course, but realtree sure looks cool, my favorite color in fact.

Good points here on camo for use against human eyes rather than animal. How many times have we seen animals from dogs to deer totally perplexed for a few minutes by an unfamiliar static object that was not moving, whereas our human eyes instantly resolve it into a trashbag or whatever.

Birds sorta split the difference, being visual like ourselves but intellectually on a par with the beasts. With them obscuring our outline is the key, especially our head, eyes and shoulders. My favorite woods gear is a way oversized realtree Wall's parka w/out liner. Soft so it doesn't scratch, big enough for an impromptu blanket/groundsheet/pillow, and also big enough to drape over head and shoulders, in a sitting position turning me into a rock or something else inanimate. In realtree but probably any drab color would work, and it would work even better in the aforementioned military patterns.

OTOH, do you know where realtree DOES work, in spades?......

Drop yer realtree wallet, cell phone or binocs in the woods sometime, and then try to back track and find 'em

Birdwatcher

NOW you've said it. What would possess someone to buy a valuable, small but vital item of equipment (a knife, compass or wallet for example) in CAMO? Lunacy!

Somewhere up in the High Uinta mountains is a brand new, fired once Remington Model 700 with Redfield scope, both in Realtree camo. The hunter told me he'd shot an elk and was packing the meat out. Not wanting to carry the rifle both ways up and down the trail, he leaned it against a tree about a hundred yards from the meat, as bear protection. After he'd packed out all the meat...well, you can guess.

Yep, Used to hunt with a guy in Washington State who had a hunter orange sling on his rifle. Bought it after he left a perfectly good m70 in .338 Win Mag leaning against a tree after cleaning an Elk and never found it.

Best 2 knives I recently purchased were from LEM.... bright flourescent handles on both! I was curious if the steel would hold and edge and lets just say I used the skinner to skin out a moose and never touched the edge so it was ok... much harder to loose too!

Jeff