'Dazzle': deceiving the eye and brain.

[Thomas Dai]

'Dazzle' paint schemes were used initially by the British and later by the US in WWI, and to an extent in WWII, to deceive the eye and brain into the exact positioning and movement of ships (it was also sometimes used for 'planes, vehicles, buildings etc). Dazzle wasn't meant to hide or conceal or 'camouflage' the object ship but rather to confuse the eye, particularly that of a submarine skipper looking through a periscope as to his target ships positioning, speed, range, direction etc.

Here's a nice photo example taken from the wiki-web. In this case the ship, yes it really is only one ship, is stationary in harbour, but the exact position particularly of its bow is difficult to establish by eye -


Dead-ground is one of the best known uses of eye/brain-confusion on golf courses but to what extent are other techniques more akin to the 'dazzle' concept deliberately used to fool or confuse the eye/brain into playing a shot where all is not as it may initially appear? Shadow and sunlight? Different coloured grasses and textures?

Some photo examples would be good.

atb

[Tom_Doak]

Most golf course architects dazzle the golfers with bunkers.  Some are strategic, some are penal, and others are just eye candy; but all of them attract a lot of attention and affect where players aim their next shot.


The more subtle effects of hidden ground and scary horizons over the backs of greens are more in the manner of camouflage than dazzle, I think.  Perhaps a blind tee shot over a ridge is a form of dazzle?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Small bunker close, large bunker further away.

Done well this can really confuse.

[Tom_Doak]

Small bunker close, large bunker further away.

Done well this can really confuse.

D'oh.  Yes, we have done this.  If you get the sand line all the way to the top of the near bunker (or through a gap in the horizon line), you can make it look like the two bunkers are actually one.  The Valley Club has a number of those; we copied the idea at Beechtree and Stone Eagle.

[James Brown]

This effect is especially acute in first time play situations.  Nothing makes me happier than figuring out by eye that a bunker that's intended to look tight to the green is in fact 30 yards short. 

[Anthony Gholz]

Gentlemen:


I thought today's TV course, Albany in the Bahamas, had a certain amount of dazzle with all the Muhly plants looking like individual plants, as they are, but also combining in the waste and bunkers to make the target line questionable.  There was a "buckshot" or painterly "pointillist" affect in some of the sight lines that made it difficult to see the fairway surface.


Anthony

[Greg Chambers]

I thought the plants looked like linear obnoxiousness...was really difficult to watch.

[Sean_A]

Small bunker close, large bunker further away.

Done well this can really confuse.

D'oh.  Yes, we have done this.  If you get the sand line all the way to the top of the near bunker (or through a gap in the horizon line), you can make it look like the two bunkers are actually one.  The Valley Club has a number of those; we copied the idea at Beechtree and Stone Eagle.

Yes, and single bunkers also confuse. Not only can they be manipulated more easily by size and distance from the tee, but singles tend to be more inviting to attack.  Cluster bunkering sends more of warning to stay away which is the wrong message to send.


Ciao 

[Kyle Harris]

Small bunker close, large bunker further away.

Done well this can really confuse.

D'oh.  Yes, we have done this.  If you get the sand line all the way to the top of the near bunker (or through a gap in the horizon line), you can make it look like the two bunkers are actually one.  The Valley Club has a number of those; we copied the idea at Beechtree and Stone Eagle.

Yes, and single bunkers also confuse. Not only can they be manipulated more easily by size and distance from the tee, but singles tend to be more inviting to attack.  Cluster bunkering sends more of warning to stay away which is the wrong message to send.


Ciao

As with all things this has more to do with execution than idea. I recognize it's a bit of a trope for you to say that more bunkers are unnecessary but sometimes that so-called pointless bunker is there to sell the idea.

Especially effective when the bunkers "take up" a significant elevation change and bring the target or visual closer to your eye.

[jeffwarne]

Smaller single bunkers lack dazzle but make up for it by


1..leaving more room for a preferred angle in short grass and thus more temptation
2.More difficult to play from therefore more relevant if found
3. easier to maintain
4. deception in depth perception

[Peter Pallotta]

I think I must be easily dazzled, because so many things deceive and confuse me:


A cape hole-type dogleg, but with neither water nor sand to carry but rough/broken ground instead - I can't see where it's safe and where not.


Sloping fairways that don't rise or fall at a uniform rate, rising/falling gently then flattening out and then falling/rising more sharply etc - I end up not be able to tell if the hole is uphill or downhill, and whether I need more club or less


Any pin on the extreme right or extreme left side of the green, if there is a drop-off next to it -- I simply can't believe my eyes for the fear


In short, I'm constantly befuddled. I have much sympathy for those who want the course all out in front of them

[James Boon]

Small bunker close, large bunker further away.

Done well this can really confuse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXypyrutq_M


 

[James Boon]

I can contribute more to this discussion than a Father Ted reference, honest, as I've quite a few books on camouflage and dazzle paint, though its been a while since I've read them and they are all in storage! So its easier to reference Wikipedia for those looking for more info... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage


I love Edward Wadsworth painting of the ships in drydock! [size=78%]I also like some of the simpler techniques such as the use of false bow waves.[/size]


On the golfing front, does a built up green on a steep slope work on a simple level? Often a green like this is tricky to read as from some angles you are influenced by the main slope but from others you think the green goes totally the other way?


Cheers,


James

[David Royer]

I was impressed how Lester did the bottle hole at Kinloch.  A very nice use of centerline bunkers.  If memory serves me correct he told me it was done by McKenzie.

[Brett Hochstein]

One of my favorite podcast episodes, "Razzle Dazzle," of the excellent 99 Percent Invisible is about this very subject.  http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-65-razzle-dazzle/


Dazzle is a form of "disruptive" camouflage, and in the case of the WW ships, the idea was to confuse torpedo-ers of the ship's actual direction and force them into misses, some of which could be off as much as 55 degrees.


Applying this to golf, dazzle could perhaps be more than just bunkering.  Placing a green set off a bit short of a grove of trees, set of buildings, or other mass without contrasting features (bunker, off color grass, landform) breaking up the plane behind the green could cause a misjudgment of yardage.  Creating countering contours against an overall land tilt, if executed properly, could cause a misjudgment of the general slope of a green.  Tricks like these aren't as visually striking as classic Dazzle, but they certainly qualify as a disruptive camouflage that can lead the attacker (torpedo-er or approaching golfer) into a decided misplay. 

[Thomas Dai]

Applying this to golf, dazzle could perhaps be more than just bunkering.  Placing a green set off a bit short of a grove of trees, set of buildings, or other mass without contrasting features (bunker, off color grass, landform) breaking up the plane behind the green could cause a misjudgment of yardage.  Creating countering contours against an overall land tilt, if executed properly, could cause a misjudgment of the general slope of a green.  Tricks like these aren't as visually striking as classic Dazzle, but they certainly qualify as a disruptive camouflage that can lead the attacker (torpedo-er or approaching golfer) into a decided misplay.

Thanks for all your thoughts and comments. I like the wording above from Brett. 'Disruptive camourflage', nice wee phrase.

Any particularly notable/famous examples, say certain tees-shots, lay-ups, greensites etc, where something akin to the above has been used?

This may be of interest - scrole down - http://camoupedia.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/golf

Atb

[JJShanley]

This may relate more to my stupidity, but until I looked at an aerial photo of Warren at Notre Dame, I got it into my head that 6 and 15 played very similar, given that the greens sit near each other after a tee shot from a similar direction with bunkers to the right of the fair way.  After closer inspection, the first tee shot favors a fade, the latter a draw.


I don't know whether Coore and Crenshaw intended that, but it did me in until about two years ago.

[Jason Topp]

A bunker renovation by John Fought at our course has this effect.  A number of holes appear to be a sea of bunkers when there actually are quite ample landing areas available.  It is pretty confusing to the first timer who stands on a tee. 

The effect wears off once you know the course.