A pretty dramatic photo of Soldiers from 2–12 in their MultiCam duds — everything from full on plate carriers and combat shirts to helmet covers.
When you first look at the pic, which was posted by PEO Soldier the Army on its Flikr page, you can obviously see two Joes. And just with that, it’s clear that the MultiCam blends in well with the varied environment they’re traversing. But look a little closer and you can see there are at least two more in the frame.
I mean, I’m beginning to wonder whether it’s getting a bit too crowded on the Crye bandwagon and might be time for me to jump off, but I must say, in such diverse backgrounds (water, wood, grass, rock, sand, dirt) that MultiCam sure does blend in.
(Gouge: Thanks Tipsters)
– Christian
{ 32 comments… read them below or add one }
Camouflage does not equal "standing behind somebody."
Yeah exactly. You can see the legs of two other soldiers *behind* the soldier on the left. So the camo sure blends in… to itself? :)
and one of them is wearing ACUs
ACU's and a black fleece–that must be a terp
there is a 3rd on a lower path to the left. look at the big log at the left, just right of it you can see the 3rd soldier.
I can also read bible verses on their camo. Is that allowed? LOL
What? I see no soldiers at all, just a river. And trees. And grass. And a small bridge. No people
I dunno, Christian, I think the guy in AUC and black stands out pretty bad.
Doesn't body armor usually cover all the tan part of the combat shirt? So these guys are just wearing plates and no kevlar? Or just chest rigs even (is there such a thing?)?
i think it blends in pretty well. aren't these guys 4ID though?
You can see guns better than anything, camo the guns, the guns are black, the only black guns in the field are ISAF. Camo the guns. Black is just about the worst color i cold think of for a combat arm, maybe hunter orange would go good with that Multicam.
Agreed… if we don't start camo-ing the weapons, the enemy will just shoot at the magical floating rifle.
If camo is suppose to break up your silohette and make you harder to detect, it doesn't matter how good it is, as long as the soldier is carrying this big attention getting "flag". Even just a solid green or grey would be better.
I don't think the yellow and purple grenades help much either unless he's trying to blend in with Easter bunnies.
6 that i found soldiers. my eyes quit due worn out. lol
Multi is awesome, but is now too commercial for my taste. I see this stuff with the gear heads all the time now. I don't want the Army buying anything that is not exclusive to them. Crye Precision sure does market well. Maybe the Army can find a more exclusive pattern from them or someone else.
Whose brilliant idea was to go to the black M4 in the first place? Brown, Sage, Tan, Green, OD, are all available.
All that ranting aside, lets not kid ourselves, these are not snipers/recon, and being absolutely hidden is not possible; but should not stick out like a sore thumb, either. Off the shelf Thermal sights anyone can buy makes hiding nearly impossible anyway, unless there are counter measures that I do not know of.
Did anyone else notice the arm patches were of 2 different division patches in the photo?
They should have just went with MulitCams after BDUs. MultiCams work; this is just a bad example. I would also hope that soldiers would be able to identify enemy forces at this distance.
The right arm patch is the combat patch, the unit the Joe was in when last(?) saw combat, the left arm is unit patch of Joe’s current unit.
Loving the new cams, but the guns def need to be camo'd aswell. Miles well paint a big red bulls eye on your chest.
This photo is a ringer. It's had so much sharpening applied to it that anything would blend in. Your eyes is seeing so many hard edges in everything that every element of the image appears to have some visual commonality (white dots). This photo illustrates the limitation of photography as a medium to evaluate camo. The combination of computer monitors, jpeg compression and oversharpening are on display here, not the effectiveness of a particular camo pattern.
I see 6… 4 on the upper path… 1 clearly on the lower path followed by the 6th
whose helmet can be seen sitting on the right shoulder of the trooper on the
front left. Follow the top of his weapon.. see the helmet with the black patch in the center.
Years from now we'll look back at the black rifles and wonder what the hell we were thinking…
All the complaints about bandwagons and excessive commercialism in regards to Multicam are moot points don't you think? If it works well, why complain even if it is well-loved?
I think the Army would go for the digital pattern of this if they were to change to anything.
As for bandwagon commercialism, who cares? It's not like every A$$clown in the world wasn't wearing the old woodland BDU's! And then they all started wearing the three color desert (heck, airsofters used the desert in woodland environments cuz they thought it was cool). Now everyone wants either the digital patterns of the Corps, or the ACU's.
Only pattern that I don't think anyone really wants is the new minty tiger stripe stuff the AF is using. But that's their fault!
As sosmeone else said, standing behind someone is not the same as camoflage.
Are Pmags being issued now, or are all the Joes buying them with their own dime? Bcause they are all I see being used on most of the current pics from Afghanistan.
I can't really judge. The photo looks manipulated, like it was run over with a high-pass filter.
There is a seventh soldier. Look at soldier Fernandez. There is a tree behind on his left shoulder. Follow his name tag, above rock wall and the tree. On that path you can see the back of soldiers helmet providing security.
I see Six, maybe seven. Two guys standing right behind the soldier on the left.
Then one guy's head right off the left guys left shoulder back on a path. One guy, possibly two others on that same path. One is in the open and the other looks like he is mostly behind a tree.
I like it, I think it looks better than the digital crap they have been using.
What i see is multicam blending with multicam.
But sure its good.
You just have to make best camouflage to survive.
Maby some contrast camo dudes behind??
Im glad the army finally getting something that works. Im not to fond of Multicam myself, to airsoftflage for me, but atleast its better then UCP, or UCP-dog doo.
I want to know what happened in the new photo simulations though( the one with the 6 patterns), would like to see the army use DAOB, i think its more effective, and it actually came in first place in the trials, multicam ranked 3rd.
i totally agree with GearScout.
this version of the picture has been over sharpened, you can see the original one here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/soldiersmediacenter/…
and, while it still shows that the multicam pattern seems to work nicely, it's much less effective than it looks from the photoshopped picture.
also consider that the 3rd and 4th soldier in the picture are covered from the 2nd one in line. you can actually just see one leg of one of them.
and it's not the first time i see a manipulated picture of a camouflage pattern posted here: i remember another picture where the jpeg compression was so strong that it smeared the shape of the soldier wearing it all over the picture.
not good.