DPM v MTP cammo test
- Thread starter caorach
- Start date
caorach
Well-Known Member
The catch with this "everything was better in the old days" line is that in the old days, and for most of the history of man based on what we can dig up and what we see in third world countries, most people were lucky to live to be 40 years old. In a modern society we can often double that plus people have a decent quality of life for much longer as they are not in agony with abscesses, infections, broken limbs, simple diseases and so on. By and large it is because we live longer that we contract cancer, it was much less common in the past because people simply didn't live long enough for the various mutations etc. to develop and progress.
Of course there are always exceptions, just as everyone knows someone who smoked, drank and played on the central reservation of the motorway and yet lived to be 100. Quite simply there has never been a better time to be alive than the present day and if the greens and various other anti-human and anti-science organisations can be effectively dealt with then science will continue to advance and life will continue to improve.
The data also quite clearly shows that as the richer countries advance so we pull the so called "developing countries" up behind us. Of course there are countries where things are not going as well as here in the UK, for example, but the truth that the doomsayers like to hide is that things are improving even in the poorest countries and, in time, they will reach the standard of development, public health, life expectancy and so on that we see in the UK today. Were it not for modern science we, and those in "developing countries," will still be dying at 40.
In the Western World doomsayers have been predicting the failure of science and progress almost since the beginning of time, despite this progress has continued and we now live twice as long as we did when the doomsayers first voiced their paranoia and anti-science views.
caorach
Well-Known Member
True enough - cancer correlates most greatly with age - however this is due to the wearing of telomeres (allegedly); other carcinogens (natural or manufactured) increase the replication rate of cells and therefore the telomeres wear faster. I'm not an oncologist so I'm sure someone can do better. The trade off is does the manufactured carcinogen increase avv. life span by more than the effect of its total internal and externalised effect - the jury’s out on a lot of things....
DDT had a fairly immediate impact; however, for many other chemicals the true externalized effects have yet to be fully understood and effects may well be present and very serious.
To which data are you referring? There are data sets that do not show this effect, these data can be manipulated fairly effectively to show whatever effect you wish to show.
True - but I think by modern science we are referring to developments that took place in excess of 75 years ago; there has not been a dramatic increase in life expectancy in the last 50 years - in fact progress in plateauing (and in some cases some major problems are arising - antibiotics and virology to name but two)
I'm certainly not anti science; I don't know if BH is but I didn't take the comment that way - I do however agree with his point.
Mixing types of cam up can be effective too, in Norway during winter we used to wear cam white trousers in the tree line (due to DPM Smocks effectiveness against trees) and full white kit out of tree lines, worked quite well.
MTP Trousers and an old DPM smock might work well in UK woods??
Might give that a go.
MTP Trousers and an old DPM smock might work well in UK woods??
Might give that a go.
Ah those were the days.... you could smell an indian a mile away... ask George Armstrong Custer lol.
Rgds WB
That's what I do - and it seems to work very well.
I like MTP a lot - it's only problem is that it seems to show up much more obviously at night.
By the way - only just came across this thread - what a brilliant set of trials. Thanks for conducting and posting them, Caorach!
caorach
Well-Known Member
I'm glad you found it useful - there are 3 posts all testing different patterns and clothing so if you search on cammo test you should find two more, or maybe you already have. Either way it was an interesting experiment.
salopsniper
Well-Known Member
Well I boughgt a MTP smock/jacket with wire hood of a shooting forum 2 months ago for £25 and cant nock it ! Its what i where for all my shooting now except for clays ! 
caorach
Well-Known Member
Can you reupload the images?
I just registred a use acc. to ask for this
The images are all still there, it is just that I moved them
Oops.There are 140 images of various cammo patterns against a range of backgrounds. Some are processed to be black and white and some are processed in a manner that I believe gives an image which reflects how deer vision works.
I can't sort out which images should go in the various reviews I'm afraid but if you wish you can view the images yourself and reach your own conclusions.
http://s275.photobucket.com/user/caorach/library/cammo%20tests
From what I can recall the jackets used were as follows, in terms of colours: DPM, MTP, some sort of realtree type pattern, tweed, solid brown, solid green and flecktarn.
The photos that appear "green tinted" are the ones processed to reflect deer vision, below is an example which has, as i recall, DPM, MTP and Flecktarn:
mr_magicfingers
Well-Known Member
ah, thats handy, I was just going to say that I couldn't see the images and am looking to buy a jacket, either plan or camo so this was very useful. thanks.
caorach
Well-Known Member
I haven't tested optifade as yet but having looked at it closely think it is OK but not ideal for my requirements.
I believe that the woodland optifade was designed with hunters sitting in high seats in mind and that is why there is so much high contrast in it with very light grey/whiteish and very dark patches. While I agree that many cammo patterns are too dark I think the optifade has the opposite problem and that the many very light areas are going to catch the eye of a deer especially if you move. They may be great against the sky when you are up in a high seat, perfect even, but against trees or thick cover as the evening draws in I suspect optifade is going to stick out like a sore thumb.
I believe that the woodland optifade was designed with hunters sitting in high seats in mind and that is why there is so much high contrast in it with very light grey/whiteish and very dark patches. While I agree that many cammo patterns are too dark I think the optifade has the opposite problem and that the many very light areas are going to catch the eye of a deer especially if you move. They may be great against the sky when you are up in a high seat, perfect even, but against trees or thick cover as the evening draws in I suspect optifade is going to stick out like a sore thumb.
monarman
Well-Known Member
the optifade we get in the uk is designed for Europe where we stalk instead of sitting in trees. I have the beretta jacket and its truly brilliant and also the harkila q fleece which is also a good bit of kit.
Optifade was designed on the basis of what and how ungulates see as opposed to what we see, and it works well for me! I don't however go 'full'camo' as has been pointed out in the past breaking up the outline and silhouette are majorly important in the art of concealment so I wear a pair of seeland stalker trousers (wish I could lay my hands on another pair) or a pair of tweed breeks and a musto green baseball cap or a tweed deerstalker or flat cap.
Optifade was designed on the basis of what and how ungulates see as opposed to what we see, and it works well for me! I don't however go 'full'camo' as has been pointed out in the past breaking up the outline and silhouette are majorly important in the art of concealment so I wear a pair of seeland stalker trousers (wish I could lay my hands on another pair) or a pair of tweed breeks and a musto green baseball cap or a tweed deerstalker or flat cap.
KBar1970
Well-Known Member
UK Optifade? I know the open country pattern and have the forest pattern (www.sitka.com)...
caorach
Well-Known Member
I've seen the Harkila Q fleece stuff and hadn't realised it was optifade - it looks like a slightly higher contrast version of Multicam and I guess that makes sense for a manufacturer as there are probably not many that can afford the sort of work that went into multicam, even the British MTP is based on multicam, but most cammo stuff seems to be going in that general direction in terms of design. I guess they have to keep it sufficiently different to avoid the lawyers
I don't have any of the Q fleece stuff so unfortunately can't do one of my little comparison photoshoots to see how it goes against the other stuff.As far as i understand, MTP was produced as an urgent operational requirement as desert camouflage was of limited use in particular areas of Afghanistan, such as the Green zone of Helmand Province. It was produced as an "in between" compromise between green dpm for these areas and desert dpm for other arid areas. As such, the older 90s and soldier 95 type woodland pattern will still perform better in the UK. As for deer seeing infra red, all the military lit is infra red reflective material so works to reduce your IR signature also.
caorach
Well-Known Member
My experience is that the older DPM patterns are a little too dark for most of the areas I stalk. They are good in the thick of the sitka forest but when stalking along the edge, up rides or on open hill I think that MTP may be better. I know that 6 feet either way can make a big difference so my general comments aren't worth a whole lot but that is my take on it based in part on the experiments I documented in the photos.
I was under the impression that the problem with deer vision was at the UV end of the spectrum as this is the area where the various "whiteners" iin modern washing powders work. If you just wash the jackets in soap then you don't have any problems with UV.
Similar threads
