Seek v Flir - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: 13hm13
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2020, 11:39:42 pm
content: For ~$200.00 USD phone-based thermal imaging, Amazon has two popular choices:FLIR and Seek.Which would you suggest?FLIR ONE Gen 3 or Seek Thermal Compact?

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 12:59:50 am
content: where do you get FLIR ONE Gen 3 (for Android) for $200? if they are same price, i will consider when buying my Seek Compact. and then theres 160x120 vs 206x156 thermal resolution to decide. if you want the name and extra visible image overlay, you can go Flir, if cheap and thermal resolution, go Seek, ymmv.

author: 13hm13
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 02:20:14 am
content: The Seek does seem to be the better option.I'm wondering whether stepping up to a "pro" version may be worth it? There is quite big jump up in price from $200 to the next grade up.Maybe there are some better (or cheaper) options on Ali or eBay (i.e., Chinese off-brands just as good).

author: Vipitis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 03:15:36 am
content: it depends on what features you need and what you want to do.the LT version of the FLIR One is just 80x60 pixels which I am calling too low. 120x160 as found on the pro is the bare minimum. But the way FLIR upscales the unfocussed image makes this more of a visualizer and less of a camera. Seek gives you more pixels, more noise, more framerate and lets you screw the lens.There are multiple Chinese offerings that give you great image quality(but sharpened a bit too much), you will find a lot of threads about them on this subforum. ThermApp doesn't really exist and Thermal Expert only has one *cheap* model. Those are still not very affordable. for 200$ you will only get a very limited camera.

author: IwuzBornanerd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 06:38:38 am
content: You should also consider the field of view in relation to your intended use.The Seek Compact Pro gets you more pixels than the non-pro, but the amount of scene per pixel is very nearly, if not exactly, the same as that of the CompactXR. This means that the distance at which a human occupies 2 pixels will be the same for both the CompactXR and the Compact Pro, so the increased pixel count just gets you more scene, not more detail at a given distance.The "Flironie" not only has fewer pixels than any Seek but it also has a much wider field of view than any Seek Compact so each pixel will represent a larger dimensional area than a Seek pixel, so less detail at the same distance.With the Pro the Seek app will give you a few more options such as emissivity adjustment. There at leastused to bea "Fast Frame" version of the Pro but I don't see it on Amazon anymore & Seek's web site mentions "Fast Frame technology" with the Pro but lists the Pro as <9Hz (last time I looked).

author: calel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 02:07:21 pm
content: how come Seek cams appear to have much lower resolution than advertised?eg. take the Seek Reveal Pro they claim to have 320x240 resolution but it certainly dont look like 320x240

author: Vipitis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 03:09:57 pm
content: the Seek Pro models have 320x240 pixels, earlier models were blacking out every 8th pixel for avoid some patent. But the sensor is QVGA.This is a great illustration to you. There is more to a picture than just resolution. And that is true for all imaging applications, stills cameras and movie production. The sensor itself, the pixel size, the filters, the lens, the scene, the processing... there is a lot of components that make the image happen and resolution is just the raster it finally ends up in. You can run the same argument for phones.

author: 13hm13
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 03:34:12 pm
content: What about hacks? If the software of the "Pro" version is a big part of the upgrade/price, then could hacking the software of base ($200) model to mimicking that of the more-$$ "Pro" get one up a level?

author: calel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 03:38:53 pm
content: Quote from: 13hm13 on October 23, 2020, 03:34:12 pmmaybe only Flir cams can be hacked. if so more of a reason to avoid other brands?

author: calel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 03:40:51 pm
content: Quote from: Vipitis on October 23, 2020, 03:09:57 pmso could it be their 320x240 cams only give 160x120 images resized to 320x240?

author: Vipitis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 04:45:26 pm
content: no, the Flir One comes in various different generations and specs. Please look closely at the spec sheet. the gen3 models labeled "pro" comes in 80x60 and 160x120. The software varies for the "pro" part as you get some gimicks. 3rd party software is better, but some isn't updated to all models right now.I am not aware of any Seek sensor that is 160x120. There are the 200x150 resolution cores now and the previous non pro models were 206x156. Upscaling will be done to display images on your bigger phone screen, and some times that means captured images are saved at a higher resolution than the sensor is. But the sensor is QVGA. It is 12µm and that might show some other limits with the technology(apart from DRS 12µm and Tenum maybe). There are plenty of threads about seek thermal cameras in this forum and just reading though some of the threads will teach you a lot.

author: calel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2020, 09:15:47 pm
content: ok though I was thinking more of the Seek Reveal Pro series (they're advertised as 320x240 but look like 160x120 at best so maybe it's because they "cheat" & resize the image to QVGA size or something)

author: Uho
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2020, 07:00:29 am
content: Guys, you forgot about such a parameter as reliability. In my experience Flir ONE has low reliability. A very large number of refusals. If a person is not ready to spend a lot of money on a professional model, then the breakdown of a thermal imager in a few months will be very financially unpleasant.

author: Vipitis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2020, 02:03:10 pm
content: Yes, the image itself is smaller. The seek core with 320x240 12μm pixels has about the same area as a quarter of the image circle a 24/25μm sensor would have. That means to get the same scene(fov) and spatial resolution (actual pixels) you need a different lens as well.The seek area is indeed much smaller. Therefore captures less information, but as the equal amount of pixels and therefore creates about the same noise.Please note that there is many other factors and no sensors are equal, but on a physical level smaller pixels mean more spatial resolution traded for more noise.

author: Uho
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 19, 2021, 07:30:00 am
content: The real reliability ratio can be seen in the photo. These are not working thermal imagers. According to my calculations 1 versus 15 in favor of Seek.

author: Ultrapurple
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 19, 2021, 09:21:02 am
content: I used not to be a great fan of SEEK imagers, at least the early ones, but the more recent 320x240 sensor (at least in the FF / 15Hz version) is remarkably capable for the price.Some random but real example images here. You may also find it instructive to scroll through theThermal Image Gallery II(and theoriginal Thermal Imaging Gallery, which eventually broke but contains a lot of very good images).I have a range of uncooled LWIR cameras and while the Seek 320x240 isn't the absolute best, it does offer an excellent price/performance ratio.