Looks to me like the person is out for a jog or run while wearing a camouflage ghillie suit.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghillie_suit
You can see a press photographer in a Ghille Suit at this location:
World War II Days - Lockport, IL - 2017-09-10: Polish Soldiers
The photo was taken at a WW2 Battle Reenactment. I had forgotten I had posted it.
Nicely seen and captured.
Ole - why the need to push the images so hard? These shots definitely have an oversaturated look to them. That "radioactive green" tone in the grass is definitely over the top.
A weirdo near a kid's play area. My senses would be on high alert. Not so long ago a moron dressed like that was sexually assaulting women somewhere in Sydney.
Poor fellow. This is what happens when you take too much hair growth hormone.
Let this be a lesson to everyone suffering aging hair loss...
Okay - I can understand that but in reality what you have done is to accomplish the opposite of what you were trying to do. The over-saturated grass draws our attention away from the subject so we notice that more than we notice the outfit of the runner. Is that really what you are trying to do?
I have no idea why some dude was running around in a Ghillie Suit. That certainly would not be the most comfortable jogging outfit...
Regarding image #1. Although some photographers would take offense at this suggestion, I think that moving the Ghillie suited guy closer to the little boy and then cropping the image to exclude much of the background might end up with a more powerful image.
By the way, to photographers who are adverse to the manipulation of an image like in my suggestion; I will offer this suggestion. All images are manipulated by the photographer as the image is shot! Choice of focal length, camera position, shutter speed and aperture, as well as many other variables simply manipulate the real life event into a two dimensional image. I think that most photographers would agree with that statement!
Why then, is it a no-no to manipulate the captured image in the way that you could/would have done the manipulation when shooting?
I will agree that perhaps in a documentary or historical view, this manipulation is not correct if it changes the intrinsic values of the image (like putting a machine gun in the hands of a child in a crowd) but, I for one, don't mind most manipulation if it ends up with a better picture.