Nope. What are you prattling on about?
Even FLIR does not recommend the FLIR ONE as a tool of measurement that can be used at a professional level. What thermographer agrees with you? I don’t see any. Does it matter that the client suffers, like other posters have mentioned? Our code of ethics as inspectors is to put the client first and to do no harm.
Dan, my thermal cameras are Flir E4. Normally, they have a 80x60 resolution, but I have “unlocked” them to the E8’s resolution 320x240. Mine have firmware v1.22, not sure if it’s possible with later updates. The difference is amazing.
I’m saying we all have a reference point from where we draw our perspective and experience.
Jim has a relationship here with Internachi that I don’t question for a moment. His contributions and credentials are numerous and I respect his opinion. In the end, it is just that, an opinion. I don’t second guess my abilities nor do I speak out of both sides of my mouth…
If there’s an opportunity to promote another opinion that doesn’t follow the mainstream thinking, I’m for that as well.
IR is a useful tool that every inspector should take advantage of.
FLIR one makes that possible.
But even FLIR does not recommend that a professional inspector use the FLIR ONE to do building inspections.
The FLIR ONE cannot make it possible when it is lacking enough detector resolution by 400%, has very poor optics, and was never designed for a building inspection. It was made for non professional consumers to enjoy on a strictly casual basis.
You will miss over 50% of the defects that could be found if you would only use a better IR camera. What would be the smart thing to do? It’s like inspecting a dark attic with tiny pin flash light with low batteries.
Finding low levels of moisture is not easy, but it is very important that it be found. We have enough liability like it is, without making it worse by using an inferior tool that is 50% blind and was not designed for a building inspection.
Who is this Jim that the trailbreaker keeps referencing?
I have told him before that my name is not Jim, but he keeps calling me that. I’m not sure if anyone is home. :roll:
So 50% it is. That’s more than what having no camera aboard amounts to which in my estimation is 0%.
It’s a tool not a religion there fellas.
Better than who and what… says who?
Sorry John… Not intended to offend you just a mistake on my part, John.
Best-
So he truly is addled.
OK, I can tell you really don’t care anyway. I had this discussion for the other inspectors who do care, so I hope it helps them. Have a nice day.
Could be his resolution, sensitivity, and optics are just akin to the Flir One and that is why he acts this way? Maybe that’s why he chose the Flir One?
Thank you John. I just don’t want folks who are just starting out to think this camera is good to use. Some people would rather save a little longer and buy the right tools.
Yes he is and now I have been called a azzhole in a private message and was told I am on notice. :roll::(:roll:
Having the right tool will pay for itself a thousand times over, year after year.
Good wisdom.
Thank you, lots to read at eevblog. I don’t think the newer E4’s with a firmware version greater than 2.3.0 will work. One guy said he did it at 2.1 but that’s the highest I read someone unlocking it. I need to find an old E4 with 1.19.x.
You better take that seriously! He may just round up his 3 other members from his personal mb and come git ya! :shock:
Wow! Have they been able to unite up to three Inspectors now? Last time I checked that BB they were busy advancing and improving the profession and protecting consumers with lots of talk about music preferences (Country Vs. Rock Vs. Classical, etc.), philosophical points, etc. :roll:
Honestly, I don’t know. I haven’t been there since a couple of weeks after they started up, and that was only after a phone conversation with Paul (the true owner of the MB, IMO). I honestly was wishing him good luck, but noticed the California Kid and the Florida Infant seemed to be taking control and making it into just another crap internet hangout. Too bad. I bet Paul is pizzed, but he would never admit it. (It’s that “Minnesota Nice” thing).
I don’t know you and have nothing against you, so I’m just commenting on your above narrative.
As an inspector who gets paid money to find deficiencies, this way of thinking is in my opinion a problem and is dangerous for the profession.
1- Taking this 50% figure in account, utilising a tool that can only detect half of the deficiencies is not better than 0%, is not good at all. This could leave open to potential problems, call backs, lawsuits etc… I would be quite unhappy if I hired an electrician and he only fixed half my outlets because his 3 light tester only found 50% of the deficient outlets. As a matter of fact, I would be unhappy if he used a 3 light tester instead of a proper circuit analyzer.
2- It doesn’t matter what type of camera you use, the pretty colors will always impress the client who has no idea what IR is as well as the capabilities that IR offers.
However, you are the one with the tool, therefore, to their eyes, you are the knowledgeable one, the master.
For your own benefit and protection, I hope you tell your clients about the limitations that this “tool” has while you are using it.
Here is the side by side images of a roof leak I took with my testo 885-2 and then Flir one which was posted in the IR section of the forum.
Don’t get me wrong, I pull out the Flir One any time I can show it off to my friends. However, when I get paid someone’s hard earned money to find deficiencies, I pull out the proper tool, not the one that will only find half the problems.
