![]() ![]() In the Navy our main working uniform is very similar to that of the photo you provided on the left except in different hues of blue as opposed to blue and brown. this effectively illustrates Gestalt’s Laws of Perception. This post is by far my favorite, I like that you incorporated different terms/people to insure that not only one audience understands your point. Post navigation ← Operant Conditioning Every cloud has a top down lining →ģ thoughts on “ Gestalt Laws of Perception as applied to Camouflage” This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged Blog Post 1, Gestalt on Septemby jmr6242. It’s not an invisibility cloak it’s anti-Gestalt engineering. Our thoughts while walking down the street and passing someone replete in Mossy Oak brand clothing (“Ha! I can still see you!”) are off as well, if only considering the environ around us. Camouflage doesn’t truly hide the wearer or make them invisible. Overall, Brad Paisley, if he were being literal, would be only marginally correct. The pattern is designed specifically to avoid any shapes that could be associated quickly, or as uniform in any way. While it’s not the same as invisibility, the idea is to keep the brain processing longer, giving the wearer the ability to strike first. Pragnanz: The purposes of camouflage being what they are, the successful pattern attempts to prevent the observer from being able to immediately interpret the wearer as a human-shaped pattern. However, in the right environment, more effective forms of camouflage, like ghillie suits, can help inhibit the minds ability to process the moving bush as a person for just a bit longer than it normally would take, giving the wearer a critical, split second advantage. The pattern is designed to break up the human form, blocking the casual viewers ability to see the wearer by looking for a human shape.Ĭonnectedness: Similarly to the previous paragraph, a good camouflage pattern will inhibit the minds ability to see that the blobs of color are all connected to the same outfit, and therefore to each other.Ĭommon Fate: Probably the best example of a camouflage pattern’s limitations, movement cannot be easily concealed by a printed pattern on fabric. Good Continuation: Possibly the most functional part of camouflage, the pattern serves to break up the outline of the human form, which is usually starkly recognizable amidst any surroundings. Proximity: The human mind tries to group similar items by proximity, so the camouflage pattern is designed to never look like what it is- a pattern- to the casual eye, thus deflecting the brain’s natural ability to see it as a grouping of similar blobs or squares printed on a jacket or pants. These laws will be discussed in the order listed in the Course Content for Lesson 3. The pattern on the right, as some may know, is its replacement, known as Scorpion W2, or more officially, Operational Camouflage Pattern.Ĭonsider the above patterns from the vantage point of a Gestalt psychologist a camouflage pattern is designed to exploit multiple Gestalt Grouping Laws, which we will consider. Specifically, the pattern on the left is the recently replaced Universal Camouflage Pattern, formerly the pattern used by the US Army. The above images are examples of a less effective (left) and more effective (right), universally applicable patterns that are designed to help make the wearer more difficult to spot in any natural environment. As humans, it’s important to remember: if we don’t have customization, what do we have? What we failed to consider in that moment of introspection and solemn consideration of the brain’s ability to perceive is specifically where the odd amalgamation of tree branches, leaves, and pine cones in resplendent 2-D would in fact be useful in hiding from Gestalt grouping laws. ![]() It’s likely that any of us (and likely most of us) experienced an introspective moment of mature and adult consideration, thinking “ha! I can still see you!” We’ve all been walking down the street, on our way to some more important task or place, when we’ve noticed the guy wearing what appears to be an entire forest printed on the pattern of his shirt, usually accompanied by a beaten up pair of leather boots and a can of chew, walking the other direction. Brad Paisley may have said it best when he said “ain’t nothin’ doesn’t go with camouflage.” ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |