Few thesis or scholarly articles are available to demonstrate and prove the effectiveness of digital pixelated camouflage. In our research, the 'efficiency' of the particular camouflage pattern is defined as the ability of a camouflage pattern to avoid being detected by a human eye in the environment the camouflage is intended for. This review will focus on some of the critical factors used to determine and choose an efficient camouflage pattern, the available research and testing methodology, as well as the effectiveness of digital pixelated camouflage and other camouflage patterns respectively.
The combat uniform is an integral part of a modern-day soldier. A long time has passed since soldiers of the past once wore bright-coloured uniforms to instill a psychological fear in the enemy. Soldiers from the World War II Era onwards have to adapt their uniforms to remain undetected by the enemy, in order to be able to take the enemy by surprise. Determining an accurate and correct camouflage pattern for the combat uniform is crucial and critical as it can make a difference in life-death situations a soldier may face when engaging enemy in combat.
Traditionally, as stated by Wilkinson (1999), armies since World War II have been using ''analogue'' camouflage clothing patterns consisting of large macropatterns have taken the form of a repeated pattern of a particular hue or shade, in an attempt to simulate the natural environment. Thus, in forested areas, these analogue patterns appears as intermingled light and dark shades of green , with some brown mixed in. Wilkinson (1999) further contend that the patterns are typically abstract shapes, the intent being to break up the human outline agains the particular background, and the design from the pants to the shirts is discontinuous. These prior camouflage patterns have not adequately mimicked the intended environment due to the unrealistic nature of the patterns and the discontinuity in the camouflage pattern from one item of clothing to another piece of clothing. Hence comes the purpose of Digital camouflage.
The combat uniform is an integral part of a modern-day soldier. A long time has passed since soldiers of the past once wore bright-coloured uniforms to instill a psychological fear in the enemy. Soldiers from the World War II Era onwards have to adapt their uniforms to remain undetected by the enemy, in order to be able to take the enemy by surprise. Determining an accurate and correct camouflage pattern for the combat uniform is crucial and critical as it can make a difference in life-death situations a soldier may face when engaging enemy in combat.
Traditionally, as stated by Wilkinson (1999), armies since World War II have been using ''analogue'' camouflage clothing patterns consisting of large macropatterns have taken the form of a repeated pattern of a particular hue or shade, in an attempt to simulate the natural environment. Thus, in forested areas, these analogue patterns appears as intermingled light and dark shades of green , with some brown mixed in. Wilkinson (1999) further contend that the patterns are typically abstract shapes, the intent being to break up the human outline agains the particular background, and the design from the pants to the shirts is discontinuous. These prior camouflage patterns have not adequately mimicked the intended environment due to the unrealistic nature of the patterns and the discontinuity in the camouflage pattern from one item of clothing to another piece of clothing. Hence comes the purpose of Digital camouflage.
One may ask what is 'Digital Camouflage'. The term "digital" in reference to camouflage design has had several
meanings throughout the modern era. Contemporarily, the most accurate
definition would be a camouflage pattern that has been designed using
computer algorithms that are programmed to create micropatterns for
effective disruption. The theory behind micropatterns is that macropatterns with large blotches of color with sharp outlines are much easier to see, while
"blurring" or "dithering" the edges of the colored micropattern patches makes the
outlines more difficult to discern (Digital Patterns, n.d.). In its common usage, however, the
term digital has come to refer to any camouflage design that
incorporates pixels rather than organic shapes to create the design.
Although the term "pixelated" camouflage is more accurate, digital has
become a part of the common vocabulary amongst military communities, thus, a more accurate term for these computer-generated micropatterns is 'Digital Pixelated Camouflage'.
The history of digital pixelated camouflage began with Lt. Col. Timothy O’Neill, a former professor of engineering psychology who in the mid-1970s created the first “digital” camouflage pattern. While teaching at West Point, O'Neill thought to apply
new ideas about human perception to the art of the concealment. As outlined by O'Neill (n.d.), neuroscientists had divided the human visual system into a pair of
parallel circuits with different functions: One neural pathway alerts us
to the presence of objects in the world, while the other helps us figure out what the objects might be.
As shown by Engber (2012), new modes of thinking about the brain raised in the late-1990s. Researchers while conducting functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans, found secrets hidden in the blocky, coloured voxels, which are squares representing thousands of neurons which maps brain activity. The human mind was seen to function like a digital camera, running on electronic nerve impulses and pulling and processing data (images) like a digital camera. This would explain why pixelated patterns work well, as pixelated pattern would interrupt such processes of the brain.
O'Neill (n.d.) had emphasized that the critical factor in deciding the correct camouflage pattern is not letting the total cost of the camouflage patter dictate the reason for choosing it, when was interviewed for an article. He asserts that the requirement for finding and designing a pattern that can suite any environment is a wrong goal as every environment has it’s own colour requirements.
The following shows the procedures of the testing done by the United States when testing out military camouflage uniforms.
According to Briggs (2012), U.S. scientists make use of 120-degree, curved screen at the United States Military Academy at West Point onto which three ceiling-mounted projectors beam calibrates digital images. These images contains a picture of a soldier wearing the camouflage pattern that is under exploration and testing. A group of observer may include cadets, faculty members or active-military troops with 20/20 Snellen vision or better and with a wide range of combat experience, from zero to many years.
According to Engber (2012), O'Neill had figured that a smart camouflage would have to take account of both pathways, so he had devised a pattern with two overlaid textures. O'Neill mentioned that at one level, a "micro-pattern" made of discrete color blocks would
blend in with the visual noise in a scene and confound the pathway that detects where the object is. At a second level, those shapes would form a larger "macro-pattern," like the tree branches in a Seurat painting, meant to break up the symmetries of a target and flummox the brain's pathway that identifies the object. In 1979, O'Neill's "Dual-Tex" design was blotted onto the vehicles of the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment with square sponges, in the first major field test of digital camouflage.
As shown by Engber (2012), new modes of thinking about the brain raised in the late-1990s. Researchers while conducting functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans, found secrets hidden in the blocky, coloured voxels, which are squares representing thousands of neurons which maps brain activity. The human mind was seen to function like a digital camera, running on electronic nerve impulses and pulling and processing data (images) like a digital camera. This would explain why pixelated patterns work well, as pixelated pattern would interrupt such processes of the brain.
O'Neill (n.d.) had emphasized that the critical factor in deciding the correct camouflage pattern is not letting the total cost of the camouflage patter dictate the reason for choosing it, when was interviewed for an article. He asserts that the requirement for finding and designing a pattern that can suite any environment is a wrong goal as every environment has it’s own colour requirements.
The following shows the procedures of the testing done by the United States when testing out military camouflage uniforms.
According to Briggs (2012), U.S. scientists make use of 120-degree, curved screen at the United States Military Academy at West Point onto which three ceiling-mounted projectors beam calibrates digital images. These images contains a picture of a soldier wearing the camouflage pattern that is under exploration and testing. A group of observer may include cadets, faculty members or active-military troops with 20/20 Snellen vision or better and with a wide range of combat experience, from zero to many years.
As Briggs (2012) quotes O' Neill (n.d.), for real-life testing, a soldier wearing the camouflage pattern under testing hides at the tree line (an edge of a forest). The observer will utilize modified, large eyeglasses equipped with two video cameras searches the tree line to look for the target, a soldier wearing the at-test uniform. The eye-tracking technology allows Army testers to follow the observers’ screen scanning in real time and to record the time taken for them to find the target.
As mentioned by O' Neill (n.d.), if there are a variety of different camouflage patterns being compared for effectiveness, they are tested in the laboratory and the difference in detection time of observers are compared, before they are tested in the real field.
Briggs (2012) reported that initially, camouflage samples may be printed onto fabric then placed on man-sized frames and planted in the bush to be spotted but in a later stage of testing, the prototype uniforms are made and worn by volunteering soldiers.
An example of digital pixelated camouflage's effectiveness is the MARPAT pattern, shown to be at least twice as effective as the analogue camouflage NATO, according to research by the Office of Naval Research. The research states that the amount of time taken to spot the MARPAT camouflage was averaged at 2.5 seconds while that of the NATO was 1.0 and that of the monocolour was slightly less than 1.0.
However, there are also instances where digital pixelated camouflage which are shown to be highly ineffective. An example is the U.S. Army's Universal Camouflage Pattern, composed of gray, tan and sage green micropatterns. Soldiers in the Middle East wearing it throughout the period of 7 years from its introduction in year 2004 complained that the UCP makes them very outstanding in the environment, easy targets for extremists they were fighting. However, the even after extreme criticism by camouflage experts, their analysis showed that the UCP was a colossal colouration problem, as asserted by Cramer (n.d), not the fault of the pixelated pattern. The UCP, which was the pattern the caused the rise of controversies statement by the media was also developed based on unrealistic budgetary and a 'multi-environment' restriction set by some officials involved in the camouflage pattern's development, to such an extent that field tests were not even conducted for the UCP before being phased into use.
Even with all fallacies and accusations by the media,digital camouflage patterns that are properly developed on correct scientific basis were shown to top previous and ongoing tests of camouflage effectiveness of other camouflage pattens, such as the US Marine Corps's MARPAT pattern, Canadian CADPAT pattern, and concurrently US4CES pattern developed by Hyperstealth Biotechnology Corp, as evidenced by Cramer (2012).
However, there are also instances where digital pixelated camouflage which are shown to be highly ineffective. An example is the U.S. Army's Universal Camouflage Pattern, composed of gray, tan and sage green micropatterns. Soldiers in the Middle East wearing it throughout the period of 7 years from its introduction in year 2004 complained that the UCP makes them very outstanding in the environment, easy targets for extremists they were fighting. However, the even after extreme criticism by camouflage experts, their analysis showed that the UCP was a colossal colouration problem, as asserted by Cramer (n.d), not the fault of the pixelated pattern. The UCP, which was the pattern the caused the rise of controversies statement by the media was also developed based on unrealistic budgetary and a 'multi-environment' restriction set by some officials involved in the camouflage pattern's development, to such an extent that field tests were not even conducted for the UCP before being phased into use.
Even with all fallacies and accusations by the media,digital camouflage patterns that are properly developed on correct scientific basis were shown to top previous and ongoing tests of camouflage effectiveness of other camouflage pattens, such as the US Marine Corps's MARPAT pattern, Canadian CADPAT pattern, and concurrently US4CES pattern developed by Hyperstealth Biotechnology Corp, as evidenced by Cramer (2012).
No comments:
Post a Comment