I3BOL384 (i3 Thermal / Microbolometer / 384 pixel H resolution) is the coding for a Korean designed and built microbolometer. It is unknown in the West beyond being used in the TE-Q1. The only accurate source of information about that microbolometer will come from i3 Thermal and is likely written in Korean language.
The ULIS PICO 384 P is a well known French Microbolometer for which full datasheets and application notes do exist. Such information is provided under an NDA as it is marked Propriatary Corporate Confidential. As such the datasheets cannot be shared and must be requested directly from ULIS.
If I were to upload ULIS datasheets here, Dave would likely receive a 'take down' notice in a very short period of time.
ULIS microbolometer datasheets are available on the internet but they are hard to find
Your only comparison specifications are really those issued in the two products brochures.
Reverse engineering companies do show the physical construction and likely production cost of the microbolometer. That is really what the competition are interested in.... what is its resolution, construction and production cost. Such reports rarely contain detailed specifications beyond those published by the manufacturer.
An interesting detail that I would like to know for the I3BOL384 is its ROIC maximum frame rate specification. In both the TE-Q1 and Therm App (9Hz) the ROIC is set up to read the array at only 9fps. That is unusually slow. The array in most cameras is read at the faster 30, 60 or 120 frames per second. The ULIS PICO384P uses a master clock to set the speed at which the ROIC runs. All required read out and synchronisation signals ar generated from the master clock. If the I30BOL384 follows this design principle, it will actually be capable of better performance with no noticeable rolling shutter effect.
What is it that you really want to know about these microbolometers ? I presume you are aware that the I3BOL384 is not a VOx microbolometer ? It uses another metal for the coating on the pixels. There are no common Microbolometers using that same material in consumer grade cameras. The ULIS PICO384P is a Amorphous Silicon (A-Si) microbolometer.
Historically the VOx microbolometer has been the King of microbolometers, with the A-Si microbolometer coming a close second in the line-up. The A-Si microbolometer does exhibit slightly more noise and vertical line noise in its output. I am told bt a TIC designer that this is due to the smaller signal coming out of the array in this technology. A-Si microbolometers have come a long way since their first release, as have VOx microbolometers. Noise reduction in both has been the objective for the designers of this technology. Both have reduced their internal noise levels and the Signal to Noise ration has improved greatly. Noise reduction at 'source' is bette than trying to remove such with DSP later.
All modern thermal cameras now employ DSP and/or effective noise reduction and image processing algorithms to improve the image that is presented to the user. With this in mind, it is not always obvious to the user which microbolometer is superior to another. There are many variables involved and the ROIC output of a superb quality microbolometer may be ruined by poor or ineffective image processing that follows.
It is not always about the published specifications either...... marketing teams like to make it hard to see exactly how well a sensor performs especially when in competition with another major competitor in the market. NETD is often specified..... but with what lens F number and is that F number lens used on the camera you are looking at ?
My thanks to a fellow member of this forum who designs these cameras for a living and who has helped me to better understand the intricate details of the technology.
Fraser
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
