[Closed] Is this design dangerous....

so you wouldn’t be able to see them from a range of 2 miles from the gun sights on a Dreadnought?
fairly low risk.

That depends on where you commute...

That depends on where you commute…

Are who the rider is.

The idea of dazzle camouflage wasn't to conceal the ship, just to confuse the enemy about the range bearing of the ship to make gunnery difficult. I can't see how that has much relevance to cycling. And that's not dazzle camouflage anyway.

You're overthinking it. A lot.

You’re overthinking it. A lot.

Yeah probably, I do that.

The idea of dazzle camouflage wasn’t to conceal the ship, just to confuse the enemy about the range bearing of the ship to make gunnery difficult. I can’t see how that has much relevance to cycling

Yeah I know that, but anything that makes a cyclist more difficult to see or breaks up their silhouette is probably bad (which even if this isn't dazzle camo then I think this could do that).

but anything that makes a cyclist more difficult to see

Like roadies who wear just black, on black bikes & no lights?

but anything that makes a cyclist more difficult to see

Does it make them harder to see? Contrasting patterns generally help visibility. Dazzle camouflage fell out of use for this reason. As targeting equipment improved it lost what effectiveness it had and became a liability. So got replaced with pure camouflage.

Easy to see.

Difficult to see.

Roads are traditionally black. Drivers generally seem able to see them.

anything that makes a cyclist more difficult to see or breaks up their silhouette is probably bad

Anything that’s based on the premise of “you can’t wear this because people would like to drive their cars as quickly as possible and/or not pay full attention to what’s around them without having their day spoiled by someone else carelessly ending up on their windscreen” is a lot worse.

I like a bit of camo, but those designs are just nasty.

Does the top go over the bib bit or under like a set of dungarees? No bearing on the OP, I’m just curious?

Looks quite a bit like this

Which is pretty easy to see

Roads are traditionally black. Drivers generally seem able to see them.

Which is why a contrast between the road & the cyclist is maybe a good idea & I try to be easily seen. I don't want drivers thinking I'm part of the road.

It would be dangerous if you wore in a pub in Glasgow...nothing to do with the pattern though

I always think contrast is easier to see than fluorescent. Those white bands on solid colours for example break up the pattern . Anyway I use flashing front and rear light during the day.

Here's an experiment. Put the picture of the jersey on your phone screen. Prop the phone up at one end of a room. Stand at the other end of the room and look at the picture. Are you dazzled or does it just look blotchy / grey?

I put it to you that this is just a decorative pattern with no discernible visibility benefits.

With reference to hols2's pictures, I would change the captions.
1)Hard to forget.
2)Easy to look at at.

I agree with the OP. For me that breaks up the outline & makes it more difficult to see a ‘cyclist shape’ but you’d probably need to see it in the flesh to see how effective it is as camouflage. I don’t necessarily think you should be required to wear hi-biz, but I don’t think it’s a great idea to make things difficult for other road users. As an aside I’m not a big fan of black, but an all black cyclist is actually quite good at producing a solid, identifiable shape so is quite good for conspicuity. (Unless the light level is low.)

What's that ahead Margaret?

I'm not sure Roy... I think I can make out the shape of a bicycle, a pair of human legs and a head but the space in between... its like someone has opened a wormhole into a 6th dimension and where the body should be, there exists only a depthless void that has bedazzled my eyes and hijacked my visual cortex such that I can no longer determine the nature of the form before me.

I'm pretty sure it's just some chap with triangles on his push bike jumper Margaret.

No... Wait.. Oh yes so it is. How foolish of me.

"such that I can no longer determine the nature of the form before me."

From what I remember this, which you said sarcastically, is exactly what does happen.

Hence designs like this:

That's very clearly a plane. It's not like it's invisible because someone's painted a cockpit canopy on the underside.

Edit: With all the talk of dazzle camouflage, can everybody else see the car hiding in this photo?

“such that I can no longer determine the nature of the form before me.”

From what I remember this, which you said sarcastically, is exactly what does happen.

Indeed, the effectiveness of camouflage is well proven but unless you cycle in an environment dominated by the monochrome triangles then this specific pattern is not going to offer much is it?

If anything, covering a curved surface in a regular, contrasting pattern will make it easier to perceive the shape, not less.

An example of covering an object in a regular contrasting pattern in order to make it harder to perceive the shape:

Out of interest does anybody bother keeping an eye out when they are on the road to see what works and what doesn’t in terms of conspicuity? It never fails to amaze me in these sort of threads how much people seem to just trot out preconceived notions without ever once appearing to have to actually based the argument on the evidence of their own eyes.

An example of covering an object in a regular contrasting pattern in order to make it harder to perceive the shape:

Except that that is an irregular contrasting pattern. The idea is to make it harder for rivals to map the curved panelwork from photos, not to conceal the vehicle.

So if you happen across something you can't identify when driving your car you just think **** it and drive straight into it?

So if you happen across something you can’t identify when driving your car you just think **** it and drive straight into it?

An example of covering an object in a regular contrasting pattern in order to make it harder to perceive the shape:

That's pretty impressive actually. It took me a couple of minutes of hard staring before I realised it was a seagull and not a washing machine.

ajaj - it's still very VERY clearly a car. The only thing the pattern does is remove the brain's ability to perceive the 3D shape and contours. It doesn't break up the outline or make it less obviously a car.

The Definitive 11Foot8 Bridge Crash Compilation

Nah, I don't get it, I watched all* ten minutes of the video, still can't tell what's going on. Gonna have to go to the website to find out more.

it’s still very VERY clearly a car. The only thing the pattern does is remove the brain’s ability to perceive the 3D shape and contours.

It's still very clearly a car. The shadows and reflections hinder the ability of the pattern to confuse the brain.

https://www.prendas.co.uk/collections/peugeot-retro-checkerboard