Auxiliary Pics - General - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=Binladen34;43335267]That's the control from for Chernobyl isn't it? How'd somebody get in there?[/QUOTE] Don't think it is, the writing isn't in Cyrillic.

[QUOTE=SEKCobra;43335286]wtf is that?[/QUOTE] Kelenfold Power Station in Hungary

Also [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmn8La6AD-0[/media]

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43335054]Um, they still do?[/QUOTE] He's talking about the Multicam epidemic. United States: [t]http://www.americanspecialops.com/images/photos/special-forces/special-forces-multicam-hr.jpg[/t] Poland: [t]http://i28.servimg.com/u/f28/11/28/71/91/pologn12.jpg[/t] United Kingdom: [t]http://strikehold.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/uk-mtp.jpg[/t] Australia: [t]http://images-kitup.military.com/wp-content/gallery/australian-sas-in-crye-multicam-combat-uniforms/australian-sas-crye4.jpg[/t] Denmark: [t]http://cdn-2-service.phanfare.com/images/9476145_5905664_178046803_Web_5/Image-9476145-178046803-2-Web_0_9089960b48dd6d652e151b48d1f68a03_1[/t] Russia: [t]http://kitup.military.com/.a/6a00d8341ceee153ef0133ec67d149970b-800wi.jpg[/t] and the list goes on and on and on.

There is a very sensible reason why infantry isn't dressed like this anymore: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/1VK22pB.jpg[/IMG] (1800-something Danish infantry) You would be able to see those bastards several hundred meters away.

Wow so militaries became more efficient? what a tragedy! and it's not like militaries don't have formal uniforms anymore US [img]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/180px-Pat_Tillman.US_Army_uniform.jpg[/img] Poland [img]http://oldstersview.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/polisharmy_1294148c.jpg[/img] UK [img]http://www.acoy.co.uk/USERIMAGES/natphoto2.jpg[/img] Australian [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Australian_sailor_and_soldier_wearing_formal_uniforms_2011.jpg[/img] Denmark [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Danish_Royal_Guard_Present_Arms.jpg[/img] Russia [img]http://www.formiche.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/russia.jpg[/img] And the list goes on and on and on

multicam is not multi camouflage it's afghanistan camouflage, but that's rarely how it's treated. it's not "efficient". it's convenient. [editline]28th December 2013[/editline] the separation of formal and combat uniforms during the 19th century is an entirely different matter. I love seeing different countries' formal uniforms, it gives them a specific identity, but soldiers in training and in combat don't have a national identity anymore. There are certain countries that use Multicam for units specifically stationed in Afghanistan, generally in smaller numbers, and that's perfectly normal, but it bothers me that some others have adopted it as their standard outfit.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;43335543]multicam is not multi camouflage it's afghanistan camouflage, but that's rarely how it's treated. it's not "efficient". it's convenient. [editline]28th December 2013[/editline] the separation of formal and combat uniforms during the 19th century is an entirely different matter. I love seeing different countries' formal uniforms, it gives them a specific identity, but soldiers in training and in combat don't have a national identity anymore. There are certain countries that use Multicam for units specifically stationed in Afghanistan, generally in smaller numbers, and that's perfectly normal, but it bothers me that some others have adopted it as their standard outfit.[/QUOTE] They've adopted it as the standard uniform because it works at breaking up outlines, which is what it's designed to do. So that means it's the most efficient camo out there at the moment. Soldiers haven't lost their national identity, lol. Thats what flag patches on their shoulders are for. Even in your post, it's easy to identify soldiers of different nationalities because of the colors in their camouflage, which is exactly how it has worked ever since militaries abandoned single color uniforms. [IMG]http://meroveo.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/acu-mountain.jpg[/IMG] Multicam isn't designed to make soldiers invisible, it, like every other camo, is designed to break up the outlines at a distance to make soldiers harder to spot and distinguish.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43140826][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/wXS2K8A.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Vietnam War version of the King Arthur legend?

[QUOTE=RobbL;43336058]WW2 version of the King Arthur legend?[/QUOTE]the M60 wasn't a thing in WW2

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;43336106]Bit to far back, think WWI and WWII. If you remove most symbols from the pictures of then and now, you would to need to do your very best to distinguish combat uniforms today while you can who is what back then. Efficient or not? I get that, but we sure start to lack some cultural identity and originality. Just be happy I don't have a say about it :v:.[/QUOTE] Yeah not really. Russian, German, Polish, English, American, and Japanese uniforms are all very easy to distinguish between one another, even if they don't have any symbols, insignias, markings, or rank patches on them. They're pretty easy to distinguish because of the helmets, combat gear, and the person wearing the uniform. The reason you have extremely extravagant uniforms like the ones you guys so adore, was because modern combat tactics then and now differed heavily. Line battles were still a thing during the 1800's, so camouflage didn't do you any good at all and would only confuse your own troops. All you needed to know was if the guy you were shooting at was a Swede or a Dane, and thats all. But when Artillery became more prevalent, along with machine guns and repeating rifles, line battles became strategic suicide, and thats where trench warfare came into place. And a bright red uniform is real easy to distinguish in the mud and muck of Passchendaele.

-snip moved to glitch art thread-

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43335863]They've adopted it as the standard uniform because it works at breaking up outlines, which is what it's designed to do. So that means it's the most efficient camo out there at the moment. Soldiers haven't lost their national identity, lol. Thats what flag patches on their shoulders are for. Even in your post, it's easy to identify soldiers of different nationalities because of the colors in their camouflage, which is exactly how it has worked ever since militaries abandoned single color uniforms. [IMG]http://meroveo.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/acu-mountain.jpg[/IMG] Multicam isn't designed to make soldiers invisible, it, like every other camo, is designed to break up the outlines at a distance to make soldiers harder to spot and distinguish.[/QUOTE] No...no...hahahaha what? What? Yeah no kidding, that's what all camouflage patterns do: break up the human silhouette. They do so by blending colors with the environment and abusing the brain's streamlining processes, but there's no such thing as a universal camo. You don't seem to understand that. It isn't a thing. You're not taking into account different environments here [I]at all[/I]. It's good at breaking up the human silhouette in arid conditions similar to Afghanistan. Yes. Great there, and I encourage its use there. Yet it is bad in forests. There are better camouflages for straight up deserts. It is terrible in grassy fields. You just can't say that one camo is the best at breaking up the outline because that's almost entirely dependent on the environment. So no, that doesn't mean it's "the most efficient camo out there at the moment". I don't believe you've thought very hard about this. I don't even understand why you posted a picture of UCP in action in the environment it was designed for. It's another "universal camo" that isn't universal. [editline]29th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43336558]Yeah not really. Russian, German, Polish, English, American, and Japanese uniforms are all very easy to distinguish between one another, even if they don't have any symbols, insignias, markings, or rank patches on them. They're pretty easy to distinguish because of the helmets, combat gear, and the person wearing the uniform. The reason you have extremely extravagant uniforms like the ones you guys so adore, was because modern combat tactics then and now differed heavily. Line battles were still a thing during the 1800's, so camouflage didn't do you any good at all and would only confuse your own troops. All you needed to know was if the guy you were shooting at was a Swede or a Dane, and thats all. But when Artillery became more prevalent, along with machine guns and repeating rifles, line battles became strategic suicide, and thats where trench warfare came into place. And a bright red uniform is real easy to distinguish in the mud and muck of Passchendaele.[/QUOTE] "Like the ones you so adore". No, don't think back 200 years, try thinking back 40 years.

Snake's camo is universal.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;43334603]Are there any mushroom clouds that [i]don't[/i] look cool?[/QUOTE] Just taking a wild guess here but I'd think that one that's physically within sight of you might not look so cool.

go to airsoft chat yo, this place be for auxilerating pics

bonus cloud: [img]http://puu.sh/62gZR.jpg[/img]

Flecktarn best tarn forever and always.

[img]http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2013/309/e/8/annie_aot_lr_by_artgerm-d6t51n1.jpg[/img] [img]http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/068/d/1/d112739bfdc4056be117dbce377d1970-d4s6ybn.jpg[/img] [img]http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2012/191/9/f/korra_aura_by_artgerm-d56o2e9.jpg[/img] Artgerm is pretty gosh darn talented.

[QUOTE=Joazzz;43336255]the M60 wasn't a thing in WW2[/QUOTE] *nam version of the king arthur legend

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/L7aLkls.jpg[/IMG]

Vancouver in the 30's [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-Coal-Harbour.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Granville-Bridge-1934.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Lions-Gate-Bridge-Construction.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-aerial-past-1.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Hotel-Vancouver-construction.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-aerial-past-2.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/photo-1.jpg[/t] Vancouver in the 70's. [img]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/False-Creek-1024x790.jpg[/img] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-1974.jpg[/t] [t]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Chinatown-1978.jpg[/t] [img]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-Harbour-Centre-1977.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=pentium;43348322][img]http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Vancouver-Harbour-Centre-1977.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] What a hideous building.

[QUOTE=fritzel;43344572][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/L7aLkls.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] That fucking game is the best thing ever. [video=youtube;U-yQ28oQDyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-yQ28oQDyo[/video] [I]Some day you feed on a tree frog[/I]

[QUOTE=Foxton;43343368]go to airsoft chat yo, this place be for auxilerating pics[/QUOTE] I honestly thought that was where I was, then I realised the usernames don't match up.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;43350096][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/1UJpJ2l.gif[/IMG] [url=http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/facerig/x/5813759]THIS IS GOING TO BE A THING![/url][/QUOTE] This is really neat.

The following are pictures of ritual dresses from areas of europe where timeless pagan traditions are still upheld. [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/4.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/5.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/1.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/2.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/3.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG] Those are the only one's a found in full resolution, but the photographer has provided the rest of the images on [URL="http://www.charlesfreger.com/works/index.php?UserSerie=Wilder%20Mann"]his website.[/URL] fixed the website link

They look more like modern, artsy, edgy photographs rather than costumes people would use in serious things they believe in.

horrifying

[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43351419] [IMG]http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/04/12/1.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] They look like llama fursuitters.