|
Post a Reply | Back to Threads | Back to Forums
| Title | By | Posted On |
| Video capture/frame grab approach |
keithwins |
4/27/2007 |
I'm considering getting an IR camera, but I'm wondering about getting a NTSC-out camera and then recording the IR video, with frame captures when I want. This is for building performance analysis.
I realize the obvious reasons one might not do this (mostly, convenience of having a small hand-held unit). Aside from those, does anyone have experience/perspectives on this? I'm thinking of using the Thermal-Eye 300D which is a 320x240 BST .07 NETD camera. Thanks!
Keith |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
| Re:Video capture/frame grab approach |
keithwins |
4/27/2007 |
Oops, I really didn't mean to flog a competitors product, I think FLIR makes some NTSC-out cameras too? I forgot this is a FLIR site, sorry.
k |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
| Re:Video capture/frame grab approach |
john@FLIR |
4/27/2007 |
Hi Keith,
We use Archos portable DVR's with some of our IR cameras. Small, inexpensive, and highly portable my Archos will record ~130 hours of video.
The FLIR B2 is now only $8,450 and they are also available with a HIGH SENSITIVITY array, the image is awesome. You'll find the performance of the FLIR microbolometer array is much better than the older BST technology. The B2 has standard NTSC output, stores JPEG images, laser locatIR, and you can order it with a wide angle lens for the same price if you prefer. We have thousands in use for building applications.
Good luck,
John Keane
1-800-GO-INFRA |
 |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
| Re:Video capture/frame grab approach |
keithwins |
4/28/2007 |
Thanks so much for the reply.
Why is the microbolometer better than the BST? That is, I would think once you've specified resolution, & NETD, doesn't that largely specify what your image is going to consist of, aside from image-processing choices which can of course change pallettes, polarity, etc but don't have anything to do with the fundamental image quality? Of course, it seems to me that temperature measurement is rarely or never needed for building performance analysis: a number of other considerations might enter the picture with that.
Also, my understanding is that microbolometers are susceptible to damage by solar exposure, and the BSTs aren't, no? Of course, that shouldn't really make much difference, it shouldn't be that hard to remember not to stare into the sun :-)
Thanks for helping me understand my choices.
Keith |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
| Re:Video capture/frame grab approach |
Gary Orlove |
4/30/2007 |
BST detectors have a tendency to outline hot areas of an image with a "shadow" or "halo". This can confuse interpretation since the halo is an artifact and not a true representation of the thermal condition being viewed.
Gary Orlove
Infrared Training Center |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
| Re:Video capture/frame grab approach |
greenlabs |
11/28/2007 |
keithwins wrote:
sidering getting an IR camera, but I'm wondering about getting a NTSC-out camera and then recording the IR video, with frame captures when I want. This is for building performance analysis.
I realize the obvious reasons one might not do this (mostly, convenience of having a small hand-held unit). Aside from those, does anyone have experience/perspectives on this? I'm thinking of using the Thermal-Eye 300D which is a 320x240 BST .07 NETD camera. Thanks!
Keith It's possible to know why do you want to record the camera video output ?
Based on my experience the simple recording of Ir video doesn't allow a future use for off line analysis, so you can just replay the video sognal and gives some comments but not mearing results.
Otherwise you need special measuring chain with frame grabber and signal conditioning and software in order to capture also the IR parameters inside the images.
Please excuse me if I'm in error |
| Quote Message and Reply |
| |
|
|
