A realtor was asking me about it. Check it out http://therm-app.com/therm-app/
Won’t be long and they will have one like google glass.
That’s what I want.
I would just get C2 by FLIR for less.
For the money I don’t think it’s offering you anything more in terms of quality and FLIR invented the technology. Looks more like a knock off of another Fluke products that attaches to the lens of your phone.
Again less money.
I think the resolution is better than the flir.
I don’t know what micro blobs are… Seems kind of misleading.
What technology was that?
Mmm. Sometimes folks find themselves out of their depth and respond by discounting that which they don’t understand…
That’s why lawmakers, liberals and other simpletons think there are simple solutions to every issue. Then they discover the law of unintended consequences.
How are you doing getting those images posted from yer phone?
Hey Evans, is there a reason you feel compelled to respond to any post regarding a lesser camera than the one you carry? I don’t need a history lesson or a lesson on interpretation of what I see while looking through my FLIR camera. It loads just fine onto my iPhone where I store the pictures of my inspection along with the IR certified photos I provide to my clients. Who says I’m a liberal and who the hell cares.
As long as you feel compelled to promote the use of equipment that is not suitable for professional use, I will comment at my own discretion. Most people acknowledge when they know they’re ignorant of a subject, but you choose to advise others out of the ignorance you seem to embrace. Act as a professional, get the training suitable for a professional and use equipment appropriate for a professional and you may be treated like one. Until then, you should expect to be treated like a hack.
You were promoting peer reviews for thermography reporting earlier. Well, you’ve been reviewed and found wanting by those who know something about the field. One would think you would aspire to peer status, but apparently your earlier comments were mere pretense and posturing.
I am doing OK with my Flir E8 and sinking another sum of money for Level 2 thermography certification. I’m not sure what to think about everyone doing thermography with the Flir 1 or 2. But if realtors and buyers see no difference then it will become my job to educate them on what I bothered to learn.
I just priced a commercial building for some problems with moisture that the roofer and EIFS guy are having trouble tracking, I promised no fee if I couldn’t find the moisture.
To date I have the camera cost, the IR education cost and an upcoming Haag commercial roof class. Put that all together and if I can’t sell my education I just threw thousands of dollars out the window, a shame if that happens so if I get a call for IR its going to be described way better than someone who says “I do IR with my phone!” That or nothing.
Hasn’t someone requested you post some of your thermal images? Have you been able to figure out how to download them from your phone yet?
What is basic thermography?
384 x 288 resolution is as a high as $10K + camera from the big guys.
The company is located in Israel.
The thermal imaging industry needs a shake up. They are still selling essentially the same product for about 20 years now with few improvements when compared to other tech products like visible light cameras.
Using a phone, which is not a phone anymore, but an up to the minute, highly advanced miniature computer with huge capabilities and potential, especially compared to the late 90’s processors in our cameras, is not by itself a bad thing. How good will depend on the programming of the app.
I think the concept has potential to be the future for the industry. My cell phone has a far better display than FLIR has ever put on a commercial imager. I suspect that the processor is more powerful too. Of course the smart phone platform’s ability to interconnect and communicate with other devices and share the information is far better than any proprietary solution. When we finally break away from closely held proprietary image formats and APIs, much will open up. Of course if a Nikon or Cannon ever got into it with their firmware expertise it would be a game changer.
I think that the time will come, probably sooner rather than later, that the purchase of your typical general purpose imaging radiometer will not involve buying proprietary user interface hardware, displays, and communications as these will be left to more broadly available devices that do them better anyway. Decoupling will also pave the way for more accessible use on drones, etc.
Now all we need are imager modules which meet professional level specs. This one purports to have good native microbolometer resolution (mysterious microblobs according to Rick Elliot) and an actual focusable lens system and tunable emissivity. However, refresh rate is far too slow and the range too narrow for me to consider it and the spot size ratio is unknown.
I think viable professional units will be on the horizon and we may be able to break the near monopoly held by FLIR. When flir charges $30 list for the equivalent of a $2 optical camera lens cover, you know that there is a ton of fat in their pricing.
Thermal cameras used to be big and bulky that were carried on the shoulder, with an air cooled unit wheeled around behind the person using the camera. The cost was 10 times what the cost are now.
We now have hand held units at a professional level that are under 2K. I know we would all like a $200 IR camera, but there are a lot of factors that need to be in the function of an IR camera to be used at a professional level building inspection.
Even with the right resolution detectors numbers, you still have the optics, processor and the noise factor to deal with (mk rating).
If you compare images with a good cameras and find them lacking, it’s not wise to buy something just because of our need to jump on that which is cheap. Please be careful.
I wish we could get the right camera at a price anyone could afford, but I have not seen it yet.
The Therm App does meet the RESNET standards for IR cameras from what I can see. Keep reading because the RESNET standard is not your only consideration…
Here are some points I am concerned about…
Accuracy = +/- 3C or 3% (+/- 5.4F) … the FLIR e6 is better, which is a popular camera among my students.
Technical Support: A dissatisfied customer requested support on 12/15/14. This is the reply post online from Opgal support 2 months later 2/17/15 regarding software/hardware “we are doing the best we can to solve this issue. It proved to be harder than expected, but we are sure we can come up with a solution soon. Thank you for your patience on this matter.” (read all the reviews… there are a lot of bad ones)
FLIR and FLUKE cameras can be dropped on concrete from 6 feet and will not break. This cell phone IR camera will not endure that kind of abuse. YES… sooner or later your going to drop your camera. (I dropped an early version of a FLIR camera from 2 feet high, while it was in a hard case with padding… and it broke. I had to throw it in the trash. They build them much stronger now a days. The camera I threw in the trash cost me $3500).
The basic package for this camera comes with the cheap lens. The better lenses are going to throw the cost up to the same prices as your other IR cameras already built with better optics at a professional level. The lense is HUGE. It’s made of a rare mineral, not glass (IR frequencies cannot pass through glass). The good lenses are expensive. With a poor lense, you get poor quality.
Being the new kid on the block (from Israel), the gap between crawling and running can be a nightmare for customers. Even FLUKE and FLIR still drop the ball with customer support and they have been doing it a long time in the north American market.
Getting warranty work done from a company that is located half way around the world and is the new kid on the block is not always a good experience. Just saying.
Working out the bugs and making improvements is something FLUKE and FLIR do with firmware updates many times. Sometimes these new companies work out the bugs by making you buy another upgraded camera.
The above comments are some of my main concerns.
For about $600 more, our students can buy a professional level camera without all these concerns. It will have better optics, better warranty, adjustable emmisivty, longer battery life, adjustable scale, post processing capabilities and made to endure the real world of abuse that can happen out in the field.
I could sell more IR classes if I just simply remained silent. But that is not my style. Also… I do not sell IR cameras. I find good deals for my students.
At one time I tried making money by selling cameras for a short time, but I found it limited my speech. so now I don’t sell IR cameras. Someone has to make the camera companies upset from time to time, if they drop the ball.
I am in agreement that what you get from Flir or the other IR camera people seems excessively high considering IR technology has moved slower than other technologies and it seems to me that the IR camera industry is only now adding programing that makes the same camera go from 160 X 120 to 320 X 240 resolution. Flir and Testa do that.
If a $600 camera can do the job of a $6000 camera and the public doesn’t know the difference why spend $6000?
On the other hand good training will make the difference from giving IR away when doing a 1600 SF rambler or checking machinery or insulation on a 300,000 SF warehouse. I want to be the guy who can give a reliable written report at $4000 that may save my customer $100,000 in maintenance or repair.
Those numbers deceive the novice. When the actual resolution is 160x120 based on the detector array, then the enhancements that make it look better to the naked eye really do nothing for the thermal details.
It is the thermal details that your camera shows you at the time your looking for defects that is important, not the post processing enhancements that make a nice looking photo.
One of the reasons the IR camera industry seems to be slow in bringing the price of cameras down is because camera sales are only a tiny fraction of the sales volume of computers and smart phones. Plus the lenses on good IR cameras are made of a rare mineral that is extremely expensive. Infrared frequencies cannot pass through glass. Poor optics will indeed need post processing enhancements.
We are now seeing cheaper components and poor optics put into low priced cameras in order to produce a cheaper camera. By enhancing the photo, not the thermal details, the public is happy with the visual enhancements and lower price. The specs are confusing on purpose and new verbiage is being introduced to describe these cheaper hybrids. The end product should always be compared with a good quality images, side by side, in order to cut through the fog of sales hype.
An inspector needs a professional level camera to find defects in the cruel reality of a poor delta-t environment we face on a regular basis.
No matter what camera you have, the optics are the Achilles heel of the system.
Camera spec is about the detector, but if the detector can not see through the optic well, you have junk.
You can have 20-20 vision but if we make you wear cheap eye protection you can’t see 20-20 that you are otherwise capable of.