"i think many of us will agree that most shades of blue are a poor choice if you want to stand out to anyone from a distance"
There's a nine page old thread on this topic which argues that blaze ornge is not always the best colour to wear:
"I think high visibility orange might be a protective factor in some instances, but in others cases it might even be a contributing factor," says Green. By that he means a highly visible flash of colour could actually attract a hunters attention and draw a hasty shot.
As part of his research into hunting related fatalities, Green has also carried out experiments with different shades of brightly coloured clothing in the bush. He concludes that in various levels of light, and different environments, bright orange might not always be the most suitable colour – from a distance it can appear to be a reddish hue. That just happens to be the same colour as the hide of a red deer. Scary given that almost all hunter protective clothing uses "blaze orange". Now there are a whole host of hunters tearing around in the forest thinking they’re safe, yet they could inadvertently be wearing a ‘bulls-eye’.
"We’re still encouraging hunters to wear bright colours, but we’re telling them to make sure that what they wear contrasts with the environment they’re hunting in."
Green believes that a shade of light blue, like that worn by United Nations troops, is likely to provide the most obvious distinction in the forest."
"In a bitter irony, Davies bullet even went straight through Leathwick’s "blaze orange" cap"