Talk:Hiding with Camouflage Technique

User
As far as the manga goes, only Taiseki has officially been stated as a user. Are there sources for the other users? Sources that clearly show it was this technique... --ShounenSuki (talk 21:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd guess most of those characters just used something like this technique. The image, for example, is most certainly not the same type of invisibility that the jutsu produces. ~SnapperTo 03:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Picture
Is it really better to change the picture from an anime picture to a manga picture? ~Hakinu (talk 12:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ~Reads above~ I have to use my eyes. Anyway, the bad guys in the 12 guards technique says pretty clearly that they are using this technique, if I'm not completly wrong. ~Hakinu (talk 12:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * About the picture: I changed it, because I don't think the technique shown on the old picture was the Hiding with Camouflage Technique. Even if it was, I feel the new picture gives a better picture of the technique, as you can actually see the user.
 * About the users, Do you have an episode number? I could check if they really use this technique then. --ShounenSuki (talk 15:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to look for it, hang on~ ~Hakinu (talk 15:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what, I was wrong. They were using this one (S Ep. 60, 17:56). ~Hakinu (talk 16:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I see, it's an easy mistake to make, which is why I raised this issue in the first place. So, shouldn't there be a name that needs removing from the article? --ShounenSuki (talk 21:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Pain's summon
Should we add the chameleon summon as a user? It seems logical this would be the technique it used. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 01:49, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it should be added since it is a chameleon.--Deva 27 (talk) 01:59, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pain's crustacean summon had a technique. Granted, it was named in the databook, but it shows that his summons can have techniques. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 02:04, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, even if it is just a sidenote. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 03:11, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * In that case lets add talking with human speech as a jutsu for animals. S im A nt 05:25, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why so? I don't understand the logic behind that one. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:56, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyone? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 21:20, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well because it was a chameleon and it naturally has the ability to blend in with it's environ I think if the ability is mentioned then that will suffice. It isn't like the crustacean where an actual just name was mentioned where as in this case it could be counted as speculation. For all we know the technique was probably created from observation of a chameleon. --Cerez365 (talk) 22:01, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Mu and the trivia section
Where does it ever say that Mu was considered the/an invisible man because of this technique? I don't remember that part at all. 98.71.99.102 (talk) 18:57, April 22, 2011 (UTC)miah
 * When Mū stops moving, Kabuto wonders if he was detected, saying that would be impressive, since Mū was known as the "Non-Person". The part about the "Invisible Man" character from the novel is just a trivia pointing the similarity between being invisible and the bandages. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 19:06, April 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * He also uses a technique that causes him to become invisible to the point where he gained that name...logic follows.--Cerez365™☺ 19:09, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

I think if it concerned me to have that there is 1. my mind actually went to perhaps a combination of that tech with an ability similar to karin's where she can hide her chakra. and 2. the way they tend to have some similar jutsu with different names when they are only slightly different, like the 2 phasing through the ground tech and the few moving through the ground ones, I can't help but think that it could also be a similar but different tech. 98.71.99.102 (talk) 17:09, April 23, 2011 (UTC)miah

to clarify, I get the reference to the invisible man, I just don't know if I would rush to say it was mastery of this tech that gave him that nickname and not another jutsu, since if it was the invisibility thing that made him undetectable and not a mix of that and say, karins ability, it seems different enough from this invisibility jutsu that perhaps it would have its own name and be a completely different listing. Make sense? 98.71.99.102 (talk) 17:30, April 23, 2011 (UTC)miah

The only people in canon who are known to be able to become invisible are Mū and Taiseki. The technique used by both looks the same, have a similar sound effect (from sound effect bubbles if I'm not mistaken) and both users are from the same village. It's far less speculative to say it's this technique than saying it's another one. We take in consideration everything the manga has said up to this point. If we only listed things that were unambiguously, specifically and explicitly stated, we wouldn't list anything at all. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 17:49, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

wait... what? Isn't that half the definition of an encyclopedia? By that logic you should allow fan fiction, even some of that is based on a solid foundation of plausability, if not fact. That's basically the metric you've set.I've nothing against saying he uses this technique, but going further and saying absolutely it's the reason for his moniker is pure speculation with no foundation. 98.71.99.102 (talk) 19:46, April 23, 2011 (UTC)miah

Kabuto said the Tsuchikage was known as "Non-Person" because he was undetectable. He uses this technique to become invisible. Ergo, his mastery of the technique is what earned him the technique. It's a simple, logical conclusion. If it makes you more comfortable, the sentence can be worded to show the likeliness of that, something like "appears to" or "is suggested to", though I hardly think that's necessary, and will readily change it back should others find it unnecessary as well. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:17, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

It's logical to assume it had perhaps something to do with the name, but not to assume that it's this same technique since this one hardly left someone without a presence, it just left them w/o a scent. And that also goes for making such an emphatic statement as though this tech alone was what gave him that name, since it's equally logical he had a power similar to karin's, considering this tech doesn't hide your chakra. Even if it was worded say, this tech helped give him the moniker... I would feel better because it's not so exclusive of a statement. Someone making an intuitive leap is not my problem, but I do think those words should be carefully phrased to reflect that nature, that it isn't an absolute fact. 98.71.99.102 (talk) 23:29, April 23, 2011 (UTC)miah

Now you're speculating. Other than being a sensor, he has no similarities what so ever with Karin. Besides, if he used Karin's technique, he wouldn't be able to use this one. More on that here. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:41, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I know I'm speculating, and I certainly don't think that should make it onto a page, my only point was that w/o knowing the full nature of his ability, and since it is not definitive that this is the same tech (that being the bigger one for me, since this tech was hardly that powerful) or the only one that gave him that name, the language should be toned down a bit to reflect that, say: The Second Tsuchikage Mu's mastery of this tech helped earn him the moniker, The "Non-Person," said to seemingly have no form nor chakra. Would something like that be acceptable? It essentially says the same thing, yet it's not so definitive and leaves it open to the possiblity it wasn't necessarily the only thing 98.71.99.102 (talk) 23:52, April 23, 2011 (UTC)miah

Sure the wording can be changed, I suggested that two replies above, though I don't find it necessary. Plus, this technique isn't really a power type of technique, it's a complexity type. It's about doing something that's hard, not something that is chakra taxing, and this is justified, since this is an A-ranked technique, techniques which are Kage level. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:55, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I did catch that comment above, but since there was a bit of contention about the passage, I also wanted to run it by and see if there were any objections, if it was an acceptable wordingand not too far off. I tried to write something that essentially said the exact same thing, just a little more open. I always like to do that anyway before I change something, simly because there's less chance it turns into a fight with someone constantly changing it back and forth. But, I will change it to that and see. 98.71.99.102 (talk) 00:04, April 24, 2011 (UTC)miah

And I'm not sure about that comma, so there's that 98.71.99.102 (talk) 00:12, April 24, 2011 (UTC)miah

Muu's invisibility technique allows him to escape being sensed by chakra Sensors because he erases his presence and chakra, Taiseki's chakra was seen by Obito so it wasn't erased, was it? So shouldn't that mean their techniques are different?
 * We listed him in this technique because there were many similarities, such as village of origin, look of the technique, purpose, effect and sound effect. Obito saw through it because he had the Sharingan. We don't know if Mū can be detected via Sharingan or other eye techniques. It was deemed least speculative to think he's using the same technique then to think he's using a different technique. Him hiding his chakra from sensors could simply be him using the technique to its fullest extent, or simply being just that good with it. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 17:35, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

difference
what are the differences if any to the transparent escape technique
 * We don't know as transparent escape technique hasn't been used in the series.--TricksterKing (talk) 06:37, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Error
Dpes anyone but me wonder why the user of this technique can use it without going blind? The desciption said that this technique bends light around the user's body, including their eyes. The human eye requires light to work, so logic would dictate that the user of this technique would go blind while using this technique since light is refracted away from their eyes.
 * It's fiction, don't put so much thought into it.--Deva 27 21:13, February 13, 2012 (UTC)