NIR Camo – Multicam vs Flecktarn

In a world with thermal devices, near-infrared (NIR) camouflage remains an essential foundation for effective concealment. In many situations, however, movement, light, and noise discipline are more decisive factors than NIR camouflage. Since there are many myths surrounding NIR compliance, I compared Multicam and Flecktarn. The visual camouflage effect for the naked eye is completely disregarded here.

Different Specifications

Camouflage patterns are defined to ensure they look the same after each printing process and to provide traceability of how the patterns should appear. For the German Bundeswehr’s five-color camouflage print (commonly known as Flecktarn), the colors and reflectance values for the IR range are precisely defined in the technical delivery condition TL 8305-0290. For Multicam, I found a specification in a procurement context that also defines the NIR reflectance values. Wavelength values are specified from 450nm to 1250nm for Flecktarn and only from 600nm to 860nm for Multicam. Thus, Flecktarn extends into the SWIR range. Different values in % are defined depending on the wavelength. For simplicity, I focus here on around 850nm. The lower contrast of Multicam can already be seen in the numbers: Dark Green and Dark Brown are specified at 840nm as 21-39%. For Flecktarn, Black is specified at 850nm as 6-15%. The brightest color at the same wavelengths is Cream and Tan in Multicam at 46-66% and Light Green in Flecktarn at 60-76%. Enough theory for now…

Comparison Using a Night Vision Device

Act in Black was kind enough to provide me with a night vision device featuring a Photonis 4G 2400FOM tube for this comparison. Here’s a nighttime comparison in the shade of a bush row without additional lighting. The jacket in the middle is olive and lacks IRR colors to have some reference.

I then set my Surefire flashlight to infrared and shone it slightly to the side. The middle jacket without IR features again serves as a reference.

When viewed from a distance, one blends more with the surroundings. Here are photos from two positions without IR illumination. You can see that the black patches in Flecktarn appear very dark. However, the arm shadows in the Multicam jacket are also not necessarily inconspicuous.

Now the same positions, but in the spotlight of the IR lamp. When directly in the spotlight, everything is bright, of course. However, the contrast in the Flecktarn pattern helps to break things up.

Here, also in front of a forest edge with some light shining through.

Now into the forest, where some green vegetation is visible. Here again with direct IR light, and in the middle, a complete outfit without IRR colors. The dark patches in Flecktarn help create some depth.

Forest with Indirect IR Light

Now in autumn, there are barely any leaves left on the trees, making the environment much darker. Leaves appear very bright in the NIR spectrum. That’s why I went into a coniferous forest. It was so dark due to the low moon that I pointed the IR flashlight at the sky for some ambient lighting. Here’s a comparison with clothing that is not sold as IRR-compliant.

Standing directly in front of a tree makes it clear how much the background and position matter.

Conclusion

The fact that the Multicam Original camouflage pattern is very bright and thus rather conspicuous in German forests is something I will disregard here. Flecktarn follows strict TL specifications that precisely define its colors for the German forest —resulting in consistently high contrast. This contrast is often missing in Multicam. However, the black-brown in Flecktarn is so dark that it sometimes appears suspicious. Still, the dark contrast helps break up shadows cast by limbs and equipment.

Of course, this small comparison does not allow for a definitive assessment. Camouflage always depends on the environment, and no pattern is inherently better than another. In my opinion, however, Flecktarn performed significantly better in this test.