Fraser has lost his mind - its official ! Bought an IRI 1011 camera ! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 01:00:20 pm
content: For those who thought I was a bit mad when it came to thermal cameras and collecting them..... you now have your proof that I am certifiableI saw a complete IRISYS IRI 1011 thermal camera set on ebay for £109 delivered. I thought about it for a while and then I bought itWhy a...... well those who know the IRISYS IRI 1011 will understand. This camera was impressive when released in that it offered thermal imaging to the masses at a relatively affordable price. It is a marker in thermal camera development for this reason alone. The image quality is, however, somewhat wanting in detail !The IRI 1011 was a product of the affordable thermal imaging sensor project by IRISYS. They wanted to produce a thermal sensor that was both affordable, and exempt from the, at the time, very restrictive regulations on thermal camera technology. In order to keep costs low, a low resolution sensor based on Pyrometer technology was used. This technology requires the use of a mechanical chopper wheel, much like the BST technology of the time.Now the killer specification of the sensor ........ It is a 16 x 16 array of pyrometer pixels ! Yes 256 pixels for a cameraHow on earth could such a low resolution sensor array be viable you may ask. Well the solution is interpolation. IRISYS use clever interpolation to make an image up to 96 x 96 pixels from the 16 x 16 pixel source. Whilst such high levels of interpolation may seem crazy, it does actually work, to a fashion.If the sensor specification sounds a little familiar then you are right, it is also the specification of the FLUKE VT02 sensor array. The reason ? Simple, the VT02 and VT04 are IRISYS designs and IRISYS was bought by Fluke. The VT series use a sensor of the same technology as the IRI 1011. Code name Redeye.The IRI 1011 is an interesting camera that uses an HP PDA for the image processing. It can also operate with a PALM and a PC with the software provided. The images produced are very simple compared to more modern thermal camera offerings. I have always wanted one of these to play with, but for some reason they still command a high price on the used market. When compared to say a SEEK or FLIR F1G2, they are poor value for money.On this occasion the price was just low enough for a full kit to tempt me, and I bitThe unit is in very nice condition and comes with all of its original accessories. The price may still sound high for such low resolution imaging but think about the VT02, it is little better. The high quality Germanium lens used in the IRI 1011 is also worth the price alone. No Chalcogenide glass hereThe supplied software also provides PC monitoring of an areas temperature using the IRI 1011. More capable than the usual single pixel non contact Pyrometers available.For me, it is just a bit of fun to play with, but I suspect these cameras have provided good service to many who could not afford an industrial thermal camera in the late 1990's.Fraser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 02:16:28 pm
content: Sales blurb for the IRI 1011 in case anyone is interestedThe IRYSIS IRI 1011 is one reason why I get a little exasperated when some people complain about the performance or high price of current thermal imaging cameras. The IRI 1011 cost a significant sum of money when new and buyers were grateful for any thermal imaging capability, no matter how crude or low resolution. Even 256 pixels we enough for many temperature monitoring applications in industry and labs. The IRI 1011 is a radiometric camera so was very usable in applications that did not need 'pretty pictures' and just temperature readings over an area.Compare the images of the IRI 1011 with even the earliest SEEK camera and you realise how good the SEEK camera was considering the retail price. Sadly it had a relatively poor application though and no direct PC connectivity.Thermal imaging has come a long way in the last 20 years and has become far more affordable in the last three. The E4 should not truly be considered a CHEAP 320 x 240 pixel thermal camera as the OEM set the retail price based on an 80 x 60 resolution. The E8 320 x 240 pixel camera is still beyond most hobbyists pockets.The ThermApp and Thermal Expert are the first cameras with >320 x 240 pixels that are retailing at hobbyist level prices and offering decent image quality. The SEEK PRO may also be a good camera, we will have to wait and see.what the IRI 1011 does with its limited resolution thermal sensor is impressive though. The same low resolution technology is current in high performance people counting cameras and analytics. Not everything needs higher resolutions. The VT02 and VT04 got around the difficulty in seeing context in the low resolution images by overlaying the thermal data on a visible light image. Clever and to some degree effective. FLIR are still pushing their LEPTON 2 80 x 60 pixel core in current industrial products and FLUKE still sell the VT series, though I consider it overpriced.We live in interesting times where advances in thermal camera technology offers us more affordable choices than ever before.Fraser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 02:26:10 pm
content: IRISYS, being a very smart company, looked for niches in the market to fill with their products. People counting using thermography was one niche and another was production line and machinery non contact thermal monitoring. For that application they produced the IRI 1002 multipoint Radiometer. This was basically an IRI 1011 in a more robust casing for industry.Following on from the success of the IRI 1011, IRISYS produced an 'all in one' camera solution that was basically the IRI 1011 combined with a PDA in one case and so more integrated.

author: Chanc3
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 03:57:23 pm
content: I think I may have a little more self control than you, Fraser as for a long time I had my finger on the Buy Now button, but never pressed it in the end! Happy that it is in your hands, as no doubt, you'll deliver us another interesting and detailed breakdown!

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 04:18:45 pm
content: Hi Chanc3,,I have no, repeat no, self control when it comes to thermal imaging camerasI attach some images that the IRI 1011 produces. Nothing like the quality of a SEEK or F1G2 that can be had for around $200. Just shows what good value those little cameras really offer.There are auctions running for IRI 1011 cameras at the moment. One is a bot of a wreck yet teh seller truly believes it is worth £150http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/IRISYS-IRI-1011-Thermal-Infrared-Camera-/282061411208?hash=item41ac2b9388:g:DqAAAOSw~oFXLQgwAnother seller is selling just the camera without the PDA etc for £250 !http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/IRISYS-IRI-1011-THERMAL-INFARED-CAMERA-/182217287944?hash=item2a6cff2908:g:eagAAOSwI3RW8-qcOne kit like mine was selling for £350 and took a best offer, amount unknown.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/IRISYS-Thermal-Imaging-Camera-IRI-1011-Complete-with-Pocket-PC-Netbook-Extras-/272261008104?hash=item3f64054ae8:g:Wg8AAOSw3R1XTwQ3An even older IRI 1001 camera sold for £123http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/THERMAL-IMAGING-CAMERA-IRISYS-1001-Hand-Held-Thermal-Imager-/142011177157?hash=item21108698c5:g:W8EAAOSwnNBXTtwDConsidering the low resolution of these cameras, I am surprised at the prices they fetch. Maybe buyers read thermal camera in the title and do not realise the low resolution sensor used in these camerasFraser

author: TheSteve
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 05:03:49 pm
content: The £350 package sold for £300.Fraser maybe you could list off your collection. It could prove very helpful to many of us. Next time my wife says "why do you need another one of those?" I can refer to this thread so she knows I'm not as bad as she thinks!Anyway, cool piece of kit. I also have a soft spot for early tech that was ground breaking at the time.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 06:04:26 pm
content: @TheSteve,Wow £300I see that one company still appears to have IRI 1011 new stock !http://www.pat-training.co.uk/irisys_iri_1011_thermal.htm#Camera only £945 +20% VATCamera + HP HX2190 PDA £1195 +20% VATCamera + HP HX2190 PDA + Handle £1325 +20% VATNot cheap !I have already listed my collection on this forum. I will see if I can find the pageFRaser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2016, 06:19:01 pm
content: Nope cannot find my post so I will relist here:AGEMA 880DEWALT / IRISYS DCT-416EEV P4428EEV ARGUS 1EEV ARGUS 2EEV ARGUS 4FLIR PM570FLIR PM575FLIR PM695FLIR SC500FLIR SC3000FLIR E2FLIR E4 (Upgraded to320x240 + enhanced menus)FLIR One Generation 2 AndroidFLIR MS224 upgraded to SCOUT II PS32FLIR HS324 CommanderFLUKE / IRISYS VT02INFRAMETRICS PM280INFRAMETRICS ThermaSnap 525IRISYS IRI 1011ISG Talisman (Pyro vidicon version)ISG Talisman (Wasp BST version)MIKRON /NEC Avio MikroShot / F1SNEC Avio TH7102WNEC Avio TH7302WNEC Avio TH9100RAYTHEON 300ARAYTHEON CADILLAC Deville Night visionTESTO 880Well you did askBeing a collector, I do have multiples of some of these cameras. There is no hope for me !I exchanged the two EEV P4428 cameras for a better camera but can help with questions on that model. I also owned a SEEK Thermal camera but sold it after being disappointed with the performance.Fraser

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2016, 09:05:24 am
content: FraserWhat do you think of this for my needs:FLIR ONE Thermal Imaging Camera for Androidhttps://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1166070-REG/flir_435_0003_02_00_one_thermal_imager_for.htmlThere is a rental across the street from me and a lot of men come and go there between midnight and 3am. They are very quite and different (it is a gay hookup place). No one believes me. I know because I have an old dog and I have to take him outside between midnight and 3am almost every night. I can hear them walking and see their cigarettes. It is very dark.(it is 1:40 am here and one just drove up)If they drive up, I can see the cars but not the people because it is dark. Sometimes caravans of Uber cars show up.Would I be able to record on the Android? I would like a recording time of at least 2 hours. I do not want to have to stand outside and wait.The activity is happening in an non-permitted place behind the rental (rental is 400 sq ft) so all the foot traffic is up the driveway to the garage (where I live a garage is suppose to be able to be used by a car, ie not converted). I do not care if this was a bible study, strangers showing up between midnight and 3am across the street from me bothers me so I do not want to hear anything about gay bashing. Just imagine church members sneaking up a driveway across the street from you between midnight and 3am! And having between 4 to 15 strange cars on the street every morning. I am suppose to be living in a quite residential area not in a red light district.I would like to use the camera to get the neighbors together and file a building code violation (against the garage). At least that would reduce the number of people (15 cars at midnight one time), and hopefully the renters will move.So in summary I need an IR video recording system that has a resolution that at least shows a person at 50 feet or more.thanks

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 11:12:39 am
content: @ez24For your application I would not recommend a thermal camera. Thermal cameras are great for detection of the target but generally poor for any form of identification in CCTV terms. Any target data you collect will likely be just blobs of heat from the vehicles and humans, not great for making any form of case against another party.The sort of scenario you describe requires covert video surveillance techniques. The good news is that such equipment is easily available and reasonably cheap (in the UK at least)You will need a low light CCTV camera and a video recorder of some sort. You could even use an old VHS video recorder in 4 hour mode. DVR's are relatively cheap though and can manage 4 hours easily, plus you often get movement detection and recording that is very useful in your situation. Time Date stamping on the image is also included on most and this is a benefit if you wish to show when events are happening.With regard to the camera, much depends upon how much ambient light exists to illuminate the scene. In the past we needed to attach image intensifiers to CCD cameras in order to generte usable images in very low light conditions. CCTV technology has advanced and you can buy a very capable low light CCTV camera that works at very low light levels, lower than the human eye can cope with. Such cameras are also cheap. You cn buy conventional low light box' cameras very cheaply because the are 'out of fashion' these days. I bought a crate of new cameras for £5 each and they are able to work down to 0.001 LUX ! Monochrome cameras generally have better sensitivity so look at those for your application.Smaller PCB type cameras are available but you might not get the same low light capability due to the smaller lens used. They are more covert though. Such cameras are also cheap and you can get colour day/night mode types cheaply. I still prefer monochrome for low light working.Some Sony camcorders had a night mode that was very sensitive and could be used for surveillance. Your 4 hour recording requirement would challenge them though. They are very cheap these days on the used market as the cassette based camcorder has become almost extinct.If you can risk using an IR illuminator panel you can enhance your night time imaging capability significantly. Such illuminators are now easily found in a thin flat black panel that contains an array of IR LED's. Ensure you buy the covert version though and not the type that produces a dull red glow for deterrent value. The panels that I have used are around 4" x 3" and produce flood illumination of a scene. I am monitoring wildlife at 30m and it can provide that range easily when combined with a low light camera.The down side of active illunimination is that if anyone looks back towards your illuminator using a mobile phone camera, they will see it glowing quite brightly, even though the camera contains an IR cut filter. Not truly covert then.Finally.... the legal situation. In the UK you may protect your own property within your lands boundaries with CCTV and not have any legal issues. If you aim cameras outside of your property and monitor other houses or people visiting other houses, you open yourself up to accusations of wrong doing, spying, being a peeping tom etc. It is generally not a god idea to set up surveillance n your neighbours or areas that are not your property. Such video evidence may not be admissible in court if that is your intention. Evidence collected by illegal or questionable means can be deemed poison fruits and not used.I advise caution when trying to 'spy' on your neighbours. It can get you into a lot of trouble. Have you considered what your neighbours reaction might be to discovering your actions against them ? You could come to harm or be subjected to harassment that makes your life miserable and so have to move away.I am capable of mounting totally covert video ops against a target, but I would not do so unless in an official capacity, backed by the law of my country. Think very carefully before going down this route.Fraser

author: Towger
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 05:22:30 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on August 19, 2016, 11:12:39 amSony got into trouble with these back in the day. They could be put into lowlight mode in day light. This made them sensitive to IR and they could see through ladies swimsuits... or so it was said. Later models had a lockout which only enabled the option in low light conditions.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 06:37:20 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on August 19, 2016, 11:12:39 amI fully concur - what a terrible terrible idea! Here in France if you want to install a surveillance camera, it has to be only to record your own property,must notrecord any public space, there have to be visible signs about the area being monitored posted, you have to have formal policies how you deal with the recordings (retention time, disposal, access etc.). If you don't do the red tape, you will get heavily fined. Heck, there have been even cases where a burglar (!) complained about illicit surveillance and won, with the home owner getting fined to boot.@ez24 - if you believe there is an illicit activity going on there or the folks are being a nuisance, just call the police and let them deal with it. That is their job.Quote from: Towger on August 19, 2016, 05:22:30 pmI call BS on that - IR light certainlydoes notallow you to see through clothes. Moreover, the low light mode only boosts gain, nothing else. If the Sony camera had this feature removed, I would rather think it was because some circuitry could have been overloaded and blown, not because of people using it for snooping.Check it out for yourself:All it does is that it enhances contrast of certain colors, so you are seeing things that would be difficult to see otherwise (but still visible if you looked for them).

author: LaserSteve
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 06:43:24 pm
content: Fraser,Scroll 2/3rds of the way down my friend's page and read about the 10$ Thermal Imager...http://electrooptical.net/Steve

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 06:43:45 pm
content: It is true that they were very sensitive to IR. 'An IR only' filter needed to be added though to allow maximum gain when daylight would have lowered the gain via the AGC.It is true that some thin clothing is only truly opaque at some wavelengths of light. That is why you can still get sun burn from UV when wearing a thin T shirt. Cotton is not totally opaque at UV wavelengths. The same is true with the IR spectrum. It penetrates through the thin fabric effectively illuminating the skin beneath for a sensitive ir camera to image. Yes you could see ladies breasts and nipples but in thin fabric they are pretty visible anywayAll a bit of a storm in tea cup really. Thermal cameras can also image ladies 'bits' as the high blood flow in certain areas causes thermal contrast. Strictly for pervs thoughSomething to be aware of when giving demonstrations of the technology and using ladies as the test subject though. Its not good form to embarrass the young ladies in class.Material transmission is one interesting area of thermography. Materials that appear totally opaque at visible light wavelengths can be almost transparent at thermal imaging wavelengths. Black bin liners have been a common demonstration of such. Place one over a test subject and you will be able to see them through it with a TIC. Normal common sense applies to putting bags over peoples heads though ! Black paint and white paint can also have virtually the same emmissivity when viewed with a thermal camera. It is often more about the type of paint than the colour of it.All good fun but I suggest you do not use IR or thermal cameras to perv ladies and see their assets....you will be inviting a slap at the very leastGirlfriends and wives also take a dim view of such activities as well.Fraser

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 06:59:56 pm
content: With regard to cheap thermal imaging techniques....... there is a method that uses no electronics at all. You need a piece of thin plastic film and you coat it with a thermally sensitive liquid crystal film (available as a spray on solution for science experiments from Edmund Optics). A suitable thermal camera type lens is used to project the thermal scene onto the liquid crystal coated film and the thermal image is translated into a visible light image that may be viewed or photographed.I saw a demo of this on YT.See here for some videos of the effectFraser

author: Kilrah
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 08:05:05 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on August 19, 2016, 06:37:20 pmDepending on the material - it certainly can.Quote from: janoc on August 19, 2016, 06:37:20 pmYou're again a bit too sure of yourself. It certainly does something else, which is slide the IR-cut filter that is normally in front of the sensor out of the optical path.It's meant to increase sensitivity at night time and allow to "see in the dark" using the built-in IR spot, but if during daytime you install an IR-pass filter (that cuts most of the visible light) you get what you see above.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2016, 09:50:13 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on August 19, 2016, 06:37:20 pmBS is what you wrote. IR can certainly pass through many visibly opaque objects, depending on material and wavelength. For example, my IR camera can see through not transparent LDPE bags pretty well.Just now took two photos. This is throughtwolayers of LDPE.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2016, 08:58:04 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on August 19, 2016, 09:50:13 pmI saidthrough clothes- aka seeing boobies or something else. Fraser got what I meant pretty well in his reply above.Of course I know that some materials are (semi-)transparent to IR while opaque to visible light (heck, how would an IR filter work otherwise ...). Dave has actually showed exactly your example with the bag in one of his thermal camera videos.However, how is that applicable to the peeping Tom use case? Especially when we are talking a regular camcorder, not long wave IR camera. The best one can hope for is that one will see through very thin clothing (visible in the video I have linked) - and for that you don't really need a camera ...I have been perhaps wrong with the claim that the night mode only boosts gain - if the camcorder mechanically slides out the IR filter, then I stand corrected. However, most cameras claiming to have a "night mode" don't and only play with gain.

author: Kilrah
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 20, 2016, 09:14:42 pm
content: You obviously didn't even look at the picture I posted. The SD card casing is very opaque and not that thin, yet becomes transparent to the IR-modded normal CCTV camera. Point is, clothing that happened to be made with such material would appear transparent.

author: Towger
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2016, 10:36:11 pm
content: And as I pointed out, the Sony 'problem' occurred with swimsuits.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 21, 2016, 07:57:11 am
content: Quote from: janoc on August 20, 2016, 08:58:04 pmIf the clothes are made from polymer, not cotton, there is no difference except thickness of material. I don't think I have any to test because I don't wear synthetic junk.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2016, 08:13:08 pm
content: The IRI1011 has to be the crappiest unit around - not even a display!Some inside info - apparently this was originally developed for the Post Office to check for worn wheel bearings on their vans, and Irisys subsequently decided to try market it to see if it would sell.OK it was probably the cheapest TIC you could buy at the time, but still of pretty limited use, even once you added the pocket PC to make it work with a standalone display.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2016, 09:50:36 pm
content: Hi Mike,You are a harsh man mateWe need to remember that IRISYS offered a solution to those who wanted to see some sort of image of a thermal scene that was more enlightening than a simple single pixel pyrometer. There just wasn't anything affordable that did that at the end or the 1990's. When you think about it, people are still trying to build thermal cameras using very low pixel count thermal sensors like the Melexis devices. Remember IR-Blue..... 16 x 4 pixels only. Then of course there are the FLUKE VT02 and VT04 units.... both current products and both very low resolution. It amazes me that FLUKE ever marketed those two units but then they likely did not know of the new higher resolution cameras that were about to be released to market.With regard to more recent thermal cameras like the SEEK and FLIR F1G2, the IRI 1011 does indeed look very primative. Back in the late 1990's it was a very different thermal imaging world though.Fraser

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2016, 05:37:55 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on August 19, 2016, 11:12:39 amI am not trying to identify anyone, blobs of heat would be fine. I am going to pursue a building code violation. The owner illegally converted a garage to a rental. The owner of the rental is very rich (by the cars they drive) so I expect difficulty in proving my case.All I would like to prove is there are people moving around at 2am, if it can tell the difference between a man and a animal, that would be good.It is totally dark, I can hear them and if they are smoking, I can see the glow from their cigarettes.I am looking into mounting a light so maybe a camera will work for some areas and maybe pick up the Uber cars. I have a Samsung already looking at that area so I can see in the daytime. They left at 9am this morning. To see anything at night, I would need IR.It is really freaky when I take my dog out at 2am and hear people walking by (and not seeing them).Again I am not trying to identify anyone, if I can get a video of a heat blob of a human that would be great.thanks

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2016, 10:01:07 pm
content: The teardown of my IRI1011 camera may be seen here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/thermal-imaging/thermal-camera-teardown-the-irisys-iri1011-by-fraser/msg1011384/#msg1011384Fraser