Talk:Camouflage

A summary of this article appears in Animal colouration.

Camouflage received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Military history Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Additional information:
/
	This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Ecology Start‑class High‑importance

	Ecology portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Evolutionary biology Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

2003

I don't like this sentence :

"The idea was quickly taken up by the British, Americans and even the Germans (see, for example, Lozenge), Italians and Russians"

We are refering to1915/1916, they were no Americans. Ericd 17:43, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand you correctly. The U.S. didn't have an army in those years or what? --80.108.19.76 17:53, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

The US came in Europe in 1917. I think we are talking about the belligerants if not every army in the world has adopted camouflage since. Ericd 18:04, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand this. It says in the text that the French army "invented" camouflage during the First World War, and most, or all, other nations/armies imitated them. I don't know if this is true and correct, but it sounds logical (and camouflage sounds ever so French). Okay. Now what's the problem? --KF 19:28, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It's simple first this list is pretty incomplete secondly it suggest a wrong chronology. Ericd 21:11, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

If you know more about it, change it. --KF 21:15, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

This is done. I've searched for some référence on the Net there was an mess between the use of camouflage and the use of camouflage sections that were largely used by the USA. Ericd 21:42, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

This is an interesting article, and the passages you have added certainly clarify a few things. Well, I hope we can leave it for the time being. All the best to you, Ericd, --KF 21:49, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

All the same to you.

Ericd 21:52, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Great pictures on this site - no good for article though . http://www.predatorcamo.com/patterns.html Mark Richards 21:40, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The biological aspect of camouflage needs to be developed. Pollinator 21:56, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Seconded. The article is too heavily weighted in favour of military camouflage. Lee M 19:43, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The French didn't come up with the idea of camouflage, the British were using it a hundred years before WWI with the rifle regiments! 213.78.183.91 (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New information added

I added some new information about new camouflage patterns (the RealTree-style and "digital" patterns now used by hunters and the military), and also some information about adaptive camouflage, which should "modernize" this a bit.

I also think this article could use some information on ghillie, which predates any information in this article on the use of camouflage by at least 100 years. Gillie is dyed strips burlap originally used by the Scottish game wardens for which it is named. It is still used by military snipers today and is more effective than any camouflage pattern. (it's also much more bulky)

Merge?

See also Talk:Active_camouflage on discussion about partial merge of content with Active_camouflage. Femto 16:43, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Feature?

Might this page make a good Featured Article? --PlantPerson 18:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If it were made into one. It is still far from it. Richard001 04:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Camouflage?

Where is information regarding camouflage in nature? I really would also like to read about how camouflage actually works. I keep seeing camo and wondering how it actually helps, since it looks as if it would stand out. For example, the malayan tapir is black with a large white "diaper" on, which I would think would make it MUCH easier to spot than the dappled baby tapir, but apparently it helps it camouflage very well (making it appear like a rock when at rest?)... I don't really care to know how it's been used in the military, but all information is good. I just wonder why there doesn't appear to be anything about natural camouflage? 24.82.139.12 07:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Non-visual military camouflage

I think there should be more info on different spectrums concerning military camouflage. It isn't just the visible spectrum, but radar, heat, ultraviolet and infrared also. See for example this article (for the pics, it's in finnish)--Elmeri B. Suokirahvi 20:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military Camouflage

How about reducing Military Camouflage section to just one paragraph, since there *is* a separate page (Military camouflage) for it so no need to duplicate so much of it. Also, more on animal camouflage would be nice. Shinhan 18:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Camouflage

Any chance on adding a section about digital camouflage? It seems to only have a small mention here, and no article of its own, and I know of several articles attemping to link to it Robogymnast 18:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deficiencies in definition and theory

The definition of camouflage given in the article is incomplete, because it only covers camouflage designed to blend into the background, and ignores the other aspects. Camouflage's primary purpose is to mislead the observer; it can do this by blending into the background, as stated, or by disrupting the perception of the camouflaged object. Examples of camouflage that merely distrupt are dazzle camouflage, zebra strips, the light undersurface/dark top surface of many animals (designed to reverse the depth cues given by shading and "flatten" the object), and general purpose camouflage patterns that are used against a wide variety of backgrounds. Painting something blue and standing in front of a blue wall, for example, does blend it into the background, but as it doesn't disrupt the shape of the object, and it can still be picked up--the eye is very good at picking out edges and patterns. Cover the object in a random pattern of, say, red and green shapes and the object will stand out, but it will be hard to identify. Cover the object in a random pattern of shades of blue, and then it both blends in and disrupts the patterns of the object, minimizing the chances of detection and identification. Mimics use a combination of coloration and pattern disruption to look like another object; for example, a leaf insect doesn't biologically need to be leaf shaped--the leaf-like shape is provided by extensions of the body that are there specifically to make the shape less like a bug and more like a leaf.

As far as theory goes, there are a number of things to consider when designing a camouflage pattern, including the hue, saturation, brightness of the colors used, and the spatial freqency of the patterns chosen. Fractal camouflage, for example, appears to be an attempt to optimize the spatical frequency of the pattern for a broad range of environments. The modern camouflages also have begun dropping black, as it is darker than the colors found in most environments, and thus stands out.

I'll see what I can do as far as digging up some references for this--if anyone has any that could be of use, post them here and I'll see what I can do with them. scot 21:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, anything you can do you to improve this article would be great. I quickly wrote up the stuff about camouflage in animals just based on an external source -- the flounder picture is scheduled to be Picture of the Day in December and I needed to have a better article than what was here -- and I'm not a biologist so I'm sure what I put in is lacking. howch e ng {chat} 23:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference parking

I'm going to start collecting links here for an update--feel free to browse and comment on them while I'm gathering them. scot 19:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United Dynamics FAQ, US maker of fractal and digital patterns
Canadian vs. US digital camo
Hyperstealth fracture camo FAQ, looks to be a duplicate if United Dynamics page
1897 American Naturalist page on protective coloration
FM 5-20, CAMOUFLAGE, BASIC PRINCIPLES
A Chronology of Camouflage: A Pastiche in a Bouillabaisse, An introductory address by Roy R. Behrens at the international camouflage conference, on Saturday, April 22, 2006, at the University of Northern Iowa--a really fascinating document
History of the ghillie suit
WARPIG ghillie suit page, with history, how-to, and tactical considerations.
Cabela's camo pattern guide, with note on blaze orange camo
Angry and calm face, which "switch" with reduced spatial frequency, as details are lost and background shading becomes the dominant feature
Night camo, designed to cause interference patterns in night vision equipment
Discussion of camouflage patterns, with priority of importance of brightness, contrast, and spatial frequency.
The Journal of Neurophysiology Vol. 80 No. 6 December 1998, pp. 2811-2823 Temporal and Spatial Response to Second-Order Stimuli in Cat Area 18

Things to link to: constellations and Rorschach inkblot tests show the human ability to perceive faint patterns (even ones that aren't there). Depth perception to discuss ways of fooling it, such as the Hollow-Face illusion. Dithering is similar to the new digital camouflage, which offers different perceptions at different spatial frequencies.

Let's try to keep the military stuff in the Military camouflage article. Keep the focus here on camouflage as a concept and how it works in nature. howch e ng {chat} 21:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the military is a big consumer of camo, I think there's going to be some overlap, but I will try to focus on the "why" and "how" of the new military stuff. BTW, I just put together the dragon illusion that's linked to from the hollow-face illusion article. Boy does that ever demonstrate what happens when depth cues are reversed; the face "rotates" a full 90 degrees along horizontal and vertical axes. Pictures coming soon to the hollow-face article... scot 21:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Removal

The phrase cryptic coloration was tagged as "needing citation". Approximately 2 seconds worth of google provided the following: http://www.biochem.northwestern.edu/holmgren/Glossary/Definitions/Def-C/cryptic_coloration.html I assume that collegiate level biology qualifies as an educational source. If that's not enough: http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mimicry.html is from a Harvard Professor, and http://www.britannica.com/ebi/article-206923 is... Encyclopedia Britannica.

Before you go tagging someone else's work as having inferior sources of information, do kindly take a few seconds to look up info. Simply because you've never heard of something doesn't mean it's false or "made up". CameronB 20:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptic coloration

Shall we merge this then? I think camouflage and crypsis together are more than enough, and getting these articles up to scratch is the most important thing. (We don't even have a general article on coloration yet!) Richard001 23:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about animal colouration? There seems to be a lot more stuff in there that could be moved here, leaving more of a summary in the other article. howcheng {chat} 00:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is some material that could be merged here, but this article basically is about cryptic coloration - the only part that isn't is a small section on mimicry, which overlaps somewhat with this topic. And military camouflage is just cryptic coloration used by people (well, more or less - dazzle camouflage would be an exception). Richard001 01:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, we could merge/redirect it to crypsis. By the definition given there, which needs a citation badly and I presume is wrong, crypsis is cryptic coloration. If crypsis is evasion of detection and not just visual detection, it's a slightly broader scope (though not giving off smell or sound is a lot easier than not being seen, failing complete transparency with no reflection or refraction, so the scope is very similar). If crypsis is as defined, it also includes mimicry, thus cryptic coloration should be merged there rather than this more narrow article. Richard001 04:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've redirected it here as there have been no objections and I haven't been able to get any further input. Richard001 04:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Camouflage Clothing

Ignoring the MOS problems, I think this article needs to be merged/redirected somewhere else. I've given some feedback to the creator but (s)he doesn't seem to be active anymore. The problem is it has no need to duplicate any content from camouflage in nature (i.e. this article), and much of the rest duplicates military camouflage. There might be a slim chance of rescuing it but it would need a lot of work. Richard001 04:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Richard001. I'm just doing an edit on the military camouflage entry, then I will work on adding some info and links on Gestalt Perception Theory, an important method of explaining how camouflage works to fool Human eyes.Dom Damian (talk) 18:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]