M35 tricolor camo for review

[Danmark]

Helmet in the woods

I give up - where is it?

[Tank Destroyer]

It is by a tree, the point I guess I was trying to make was what "we" think is bad maybe it's not when you put it in the environment to was intended to be in, not on a table or under lights being photographed.

[Tank Destroyer]

Pictures were taken in the 20-30yard range, a lot closer than most soldiers would fight from.

[Tank Destroyer]

Inside picture of another helmet

[relicz]

Camo is more about masking of silhouette and breaking up outlines than anything else. That being said, any slight movement can easily be detected and observed. Regardless, modern technology reveals heat signatures rendering visual camo useless in many cases.

[Tank Destroyer]

With that being said, what about an open dialog with putting my helmet on trial with the thoughts I presented. Marty

[relicz]

I stand by my original assessment. If you handle or study enough legitimate camo helmets, you get a feel for their nuance - age, patina, and wear.

An original helmet pimped up for one reason or another with modern camo paint.

[Tank Destroyer]

John with the argument and possible evidence and field photos I presented you stand by your first opinion... That is fair enough. One of the jury has voted as still a fake with NO possibility as being real.

[Danmark]

I've always wondered how a helmet like this worked in the mud of the Western front? ( but apparently it did)

I think what scares off people with yours is the vibrancy of the colors all these decades later even though it may have been bright when first done - and that rings alarm bells. The other thing is having a opinion divisive item is like living under power lines - it may not bother you but who would want to buy your house?

Just my opinion sir!
Regards, Dan

[Tank Destroyer]

Dan THAT is a very good point and is a concern for me if I decided one day to sell it and if it is real, someone else will think it's not and it starts all over again.