Thermal Imaging Training / Classes

Not interested in online seminars, etc. That don’t float my boat. We’ve just acquired a Fluke TiR and looking into classroom training.

Most people I know said to look for trainers with over 4-5 years experience. We’re in KC. Closer is better BUT, we go to Dallas 3-4 times a year; Nashville 1-2 times a year; Omaha, Tulsa & Oklahoma 2-3 times a year. THose are all real easy access without getting on a plane for east / west coast.

We’re interested in on-site classes in either Level I or Building Science. I’m getting mixed feedback on these. Several people have said they really overlap AND the Building Science class is best for HI’s. Feedback please.

If your looking for IR training specifically designed for residential applications… check into Kaplan/ITA.

Very thorough course. Very well taught by a very knowledgeable educator.

I taken the FLIR/ITC Building Sciences course and the Level 1 course

The BS course was good in that it related the Thermography learning more toward buildings. I enjoyed the Level 1 course in that it seemed to give me more comprehensive fundamentals of Thermography. So, if the student has a solid building background, the Level 1 may be more advantagious. JMO

Like Larry said the Building science is geared more towards buildings. If you know how a building works then do the Level I. The Level I gets more into how to properly set and operate the camera and the theory behind IR. Level I also gives you instant credibility in court and in my area gives you the ability to bid jobs at the city and county level.


I am not putting anyone down for their experience level because “any” training is better than walking around taking point-and-shoot pictures without not knowing what your looking at, but for me I look towards the Industry Leaders. This stuff has not been around that long where it didn’t take three people to move and operate the equipment. The instructor needs experience in my book.

This whole thing is about “past experience”. You need baseline and/or reference scans to determine a lot of things you are looking at. You need to know what a reflection is to see if it is there.

Level I is for operating the equipment and write a report.
Level II is for supervising and running the project.
Level III is to write the company program.

If the instructor is not at Level III, I don’t think they should be writing anything.

Again, I am not talking about Intro Courses (which have a place).
I rather spend $1700 over $99 for a course to get what I expect for my commitment of time and effort.

I have taken Building Science and then Level I (in that order).
If I were to do it again, I would have done Level I first (if I intended to take both courses eventually).

If you don’t want to spend $4k, get your feet wet on one of the many Intro offerings, then take the big one. You wouldn’t believe how many come to class and have yet to read their camera book cover-to-cover!

Dan: David has it right you are the accomplished HI. You probably have more experience in finding water intrusion than the building science instructor. I opted to go level 1 as my first course and have never regretted it. Learn how to use the camera and interrupt the images. IMHO

Depending on where (not who’s course) will determine what you are taught in the applications part of the ITC Level I course.

I took ITC Level I at a local Power Company and most of the students were electrical/power guys. So guess what we spent most of our time on? We even found several hot spots out in the yard! We did cover other applications as well though.

I felt a little out of place as these guys were ripping through the high power equipment stuff (as they would be in the BS course). But that stuff is not on the Level I test. Building stuff is on the BS Test.

Like others have said, intro courses have thier place and are suited for individuals who want a baseline or starting place in the tehnology. If you want to be considered professional and “creditable” Thermographer, than obtaining Level I and Level II are required. IMHO. And, if you go that far, why stop? Might as well get Level III.

I have taken both the Level I and Level II Certification courses, and plan on attending Level III in June.

This is what I have learned the different Levels represent:

Level I: Qualitative Thermography - art and science of detecting, displaying and recording the *thermal patterns *across the surface of an object

Level II: Quantitative Thermography - art and science of detecting, displaying and recording the thermal patterns and temperatures across the surface of an object

Level III: Best Practices

If you ONLY want to use IR technology in your home inspection business and NOYHING else, than Level I will be just fine. However, if you want to expand on your knowledge and learn the ART or “Accurate” temperature measurement, than you will need to take Level II.

My thought process is why sell yourself short? I mean, if the word gets out that you are offering IR services, and a commercial facility manager calls you one day and asks if you can come to his building and conduct an electrical inspection, why turn down the business?

There is a big revenue potential with this technology, and if you are going to make the decision to enter into the profession, why not get properly trained?

My advise is to take the Level I course with plans on taking Level II is desired.


Do you have Additional requirements to remain Level (any) certified with the provider you went with?

My provider promotes 1-2 yrs of field experience between certification Levels so you can better grasp what it’s all about. If I take Level II today, my Level I 2yr certification restarts the clock to today.

I’ve been through the same training as Larry, and I totally concur with his feedback 100%.

If you’ve been in the HI field for a while and have plenty of knowledge in the HI field, take Level 1. I almost fell asleep in the BS course.

** Not trying to be a pain, but could you please provide the source for the idea
that Level I gives one instant credibility in court? **

The vast majority of Level III thermographers in North American cannot do a home
inspection with an IR camera, and have no credibility in a court case involving a
home inspection.

Several Level II, and III thermographers sat in the BS course I took and
said there was no way a non-home inspector could take his IR camera to a
home inspection. Scott Wood, the FLIR-ITC instructor said the same thing.

A Level III thermographer who is a novice home inspector would still
lack the ability to do a good job. Can you see how this works? The learning
curve of the IR camera is much shorter than becoming a skilled inspector,
according to Scott Wood.

But I am open… please help me understand what you mean, in case I
missed something.

To those who think I am attacking your Level I, II, or III courses, relax.
My question is narrow and the source of this logic is all I am asking for.

I’ll give you guys the benefit of my first post on InterNachi (LOL)…and say I agree with John’s theory on infrared / thermal imaging in the home-building inspection fields. It is much more important to know what the target is trying to tell you based on the make up of the target. A trained and experienced home inspector has a distinct advantage of understanding the conditions that lead to discovery and interpretation of building defects. The infrared camera is an extension of your skills that help you confirm your instincts. The use of the moisture meter was very much the same thing in the early days of technology use. The difference is the recording of an image your client can see and understand.

The selection of a course is primary to your understanding of the technology, but the real test starts when you use it. The ones who have used their camera’s for a while know that there is no substitute for using the camera in the field and learning from the experiences. There are a lot of conditions that can be wrongly interpreted if you do not understand what you are looking at… hence your liability can go up if you get it wrong.

As we get deeper into the evolution of infrared in home / building inspections it will become more of a war of credibility (certifications etc.) as more inspectors add infrared services. I already see the wheels turning at ITC, Infraspection and others to make more specific home/building training levels and certifications. The reality is that the ones who started doing infrared services early and have done a lot of them will always be the leaders in their inspection market.

I took John and Will’s course and was very pleased with the application of the material towards actual home inspection. You can throw money at a lot of training levels that may have no bearing on your ability to do what you do best…home inspection application. If you want to venture into othe infrared applications…that’s cool …I say see how far you can go, the technology is broad reaching.

As a close…I must say how pleased I am to see and be a part of the constructive benefits this organization and it’s members provide.

Phil Henderson, CMI

Hmmm…my first post shows me as a “non-member” …must have missed something on the profile. Where’s the complaint dept. ? :stuck_out_tongue:

It may be the way your are signed on.

Make sure you clear any “remember Me” Stuff.

getting back to your original question. Check out The Snell Group

Highly qualified and vendor neutral.

Welcome to NACHI, Phil. Warts and all :mrgreen:


I also took courses at Snell. Good guys and very knowledgable. From my background (physics and medical imaging) they seemed to be able to adopt and adapt their teaching.

But, I believe, that thermal imaging, specifically tailored to our field, is still in development. That’s why I am working with iNACHI and John and Northwestern University to put such a course together.

Check out the Boulder class in May. John and I will be teaching.

Hope this helps;

Both of my Level I and II certifications were taken at The Infraspection Institute. Once you have attended the required 32 hours of instruction and passed the final exam, you are awarded the certification level. After that, there are no further requirements.

It is up to the individual graduate to advance his/her career and experience through various means, such as on the job trianing, work experience, continuing education, etc.

I’m not sure I follow the logic of waiting two full years to take the Level II course. I’m not against the idea, just do not understand the logic. Level II expands on the theory learned in Level I and then takes it a step further and includes “accurate” temperature measurement. After taking the Level II class, I know how to calculate reflectance, emittance, and transmittance in order to take “accurate” tempertaure measurements. I also was taught how to “calibrate” my own camera.

Level II is not rocket science, but it was no walk in the park either. It cover advanced IR theory, physics, algebraic calculations, and temperature conversions. It was very challenging!

I thought it was more beneficial for me to take the Level II soon after the Level I so that the theory was still fresh in my mind. Whatever works for you :slight_smile:


Hey Will,

What course did you take from Snell? Have you taken any of thier webinars? If so, how did you like it?



Hi, good to see you.

Sign in to the message baord and your membership status will show up… :mrgreen:

Snell, ITA, ITC, - anybody got more feedback on those OR others.

Have little bit of consrtuction background in home building and commercial construction. Have a few years home inspection experience. EDI certified for moisture intrusion / stucco testing. Do a few EIFS / Stucco / Moisture / Mold inspections and a few court cases on moisture intrusion or defects each year.

So question #1 is Level I or Bldg Science?

Question #2 is - thoughts on Training? I have been to way too many classes over the years where many of the students knew more about … than the instructor. These classes are way too costly to get into that situation.