SEEK vs Flir One G2 Images

[havaloc]

I didn't want to post these in the long Flir or Seek threads, but here are some images of the same things from both a Seek Thermal and Flir One G2.  Enjoy!

6 and 7, the order is reversed. 

[havaloc]

Some more...

[havaloc]

Last ones...

[havaloc]

2 and 3 - ceiling wall corner temperature difference
4 and 5 - timer and GFCI outlet
7 and 6 - stove, warm electronics powering clock
8 and 9 - eneloop charger
11 and 10 - heat vent next to fireplace
13 and 12 - another wall corner temperature difference
15 and 14 - ceiling fan remote receiver is warm
0 and 1 - water under floor?

General comments - Even when I 'disabled' MSX on the Flir, it was definitely more temperature sensitive and could pick up much more subtle temperature differences.  I disabled it by putting my finger in front of the lens.

The Flir does the calibration shutter click every 20-30 seconds, while the Seek does so every 3-5 seconds.  The Flir lasts about 45 minutes on battery, so not much, but enough.

While it looks like I might have cherry picked examples, in general, I could not find an instance where the Seek did better.  Yes, the MSX is definitely an advantage to the Flir, but I see no reason not to use it since it's there.

At the same price, it's hard to go with the Seek.  I do credit Seek however, with starting a competition with Flir, causing all of us to benefit.  One last Flir advantage, it works with Flir tools and the images also include a visual image you can slide up and down.  These images are both from the iOS version.

[-jeffB]

Wow -- it seems like I got much better results than that from my (Android, original version) SeeK.

I was all excited to be getting a new phone that's directly compatible with the SeeK, but now my SeeK dongle has gone missing.  So, no counterexamples from my end just yet...

[Marco]

I still don't understand why Seek doesn't do fusion. Pretending multispectral image fusion can still be validly patented in the general case is just laughable. You have to be naive, stupid or disingenuous to say otherwise. Even the reddest necks in Texas aren't going to agree with it.

[havaloc]

I think you CAN get better results out of the Seek, provided the temperature difference is greater.  I was surprised how much better the Flir did.  I feel the Seek should be priced at about $150-$175 to output results like that, the Flir's utility is so much greater at the same price.  I still hope Seek stays in the game though.  Perhaps it's just the contrast that the Flir images provide against the Seek.  The Seek seemed pretty useful until I compared against the Flir.

Wow -- it seems like I got much better results than that from my (Android, original version) SeeK.

[encryptededdy]

I think one of the places where the Seek could perhaps do better is night vision. But for thermography purposes (except on high temp objects), the FLIR One is much better.

[Fraser]

@havaloc,

This is the first such side by side test I have seen. I am surprised at the SEEK cameras poor performance in this specific scenario. When I owned a SEEK it was the noise that ruined my images with low thermal contrast scenes. My F1G2 is not perfect but it does seem to pull out the thermal information from a scene very well. The MSX provides the context for the image. The usefulness of this should not be underestimated.

With regard to disabling the MSX I tried my finger over the lens but got better results with black insulation tape. FLIRs VP recommended opaque tape as well. I thought the visible light camera might ramp up its AGC and produce noise that messed up the MSX algorithm. It did not do so as FLIR deliberately made the MSX ignore low light camera data which might degrade the final image.

Thank you for doing this test. A test comparing the usual easy scenes such as a warm equipment power pack , cup of hot water and a view if a house would really help compare 'best case' scenario imaging. It would be interesting to see if the SEEK cameras higher resolution shines in such a simple scenario. The SEEK cameras noise issues will be less apparent with the larger temperature spans.

Fraser

[havaloc]

Hopefully one of these fits the bill. 

Apple Airport Extreme
Leaf Blower

[havaloc]

Or

Pipes
Hot water in sink

[havaloc]

Hot stove for contrast.

[Fraser]

@havaloc,

Many thanks.

Sadly I cannot see any benefit from the SEEK cameras higher resolution. The Seek camera produces an inferior image to the F1G2 when used with the OEM software.

Thanks again for taking the time to produce these images. Seek have some work to do on their image processing, but then we already knew that. The F1G2 produces good images for its price point and resolution. FLIR's knowledge of image processing wins the day.

Fraser

[all_repair]

Please educate me further on this.  Is it just a software function that Seek can reduce the span, and increase on its sensitivity on the presentation of the captured view?  Yesterday, in the course of troubleshooting a problematic welder on site, I got problem seeing what I needed in a quick and a sure way with my Seek Compact.  MSX and more sensitivity would help a lot for yesterday's need.

I was leaning towards Seek Reveal previously, now I may have to consider a FLIR C2, or FLIR 1  (I got a E4)

[@Fraser, Thank you for replying below.  By saving a post, hope to keep the SNR of this thread higher  ]

[Fraser]

Reduction of span usually increases contrast in the image of a thermal camera, but in the case of the SEEK camera I do not know what causes the low contrast images. It could be a span issue, or it could be noise masking the required information and the image processing software just flattening the whole image.

The SEEK owners on the SEEK Camera thread may know more as they have been developing better software to get the best out of the camera.

Fraser

[sgken]

How does the MSX perform in total darkness?

Ken

[encryptededdy]

How does the MSX perform in total darkness?

Ken

It doesn't. The FLIR One's visible light camera isn't the best and won't work even in low light.

[frenky]

@havaloc:

Could you please make some more comparison shots but with seek palettes "amber" and "indigo" so that comparison with flir will be better.
(Probably "amber" is the most similar to flir palette)

I think I made this one with "indigo":

[sgken]

How does the MSX perform in total darkness?

Ken

It doesn't. The FLIR One's visible light camera isn't the best and won't work even in low light.

So, basically, this is one area the Seek outperforms the FLIR. It's higher resolution in a low/no light situation when MSX doesn't work.

Ken

[havaloc]

Four images.  Flir w/ MSX, Flir w/o MSX (lights off), Seek Amber, and Seek Indigo.

How does the MSX perform in total darkness?

Ken

It doesn't. The FLIR One's visible light camera isn't the best and won't work even in low light.

So, basically, this is one area the Seek outperforms the FLIR. It's higher resolution in a low/no light situation when MSX doesn't work.

Ken

[havaloc]

USB Hub.  Flir MSX, Flir No MSX (finger over sensor), Seek Indigo and Seek Amber

[frenky]

Thank you for this.
This comparison clearly shows that even without MSX and with lower resolution F1G2 images still have more details and less noise then Seek:

[Fraser]

Sadly from what I can see here, only the greater temperature range of the SEEK cameras beats the F1G2. In all the SEEK images in this thread, the noise issue dominates the scene. This appears to be just poor image processing by the software. There may be better imaging possible with more efficient noise processing algorithms and filters.

Unless a user actually needs temperature imaging above the capabilities of the F1G2, I can't see a good case for buying a SEEK camera at this time.
It should be noted that MSX is an enhancement and is not an essential part of the thermal image. 160x120 resolution is still capable of producing decent images that may be recognised.

Fraser

[frenky]

It seems that even Flir has some room for improvement. See the noise levels on this image with and without MSX:

[havaloc]

On the one you quoted, I used the finger method to shut off MSX.  On the battery charger, I used a dark room.  I think the noise introduced may be from me not quite getting it dark enough, I didn't want to get fingerprints on the visual lens, so I didn't press on it, so some light got in, and I think that's not helping the noise situation.

It seems that even Flir has some room for improvement. See the noise levels on this image with and without MSX:

[havaloc]

Even thermal cameras are not immune to the megapixel race.  More isn't always better, if it's a noisier picture.  This holds true here as well.

160x120 resolution is still capable of producing decent images that may be recognised.

[schlafli]

On the one you quoted, I used the finger method to shut off MSX.  On the battery charger, I used a dark room.  I think the noise introduced may be from me not quite getting it dark enough, I didn't want to get fingerprints on the visual lens, so I didn't press on it, so some light got in, and I think that's not helping the noise situation.

It seems that even Flir has some room for improvement. See the noise levels on this image with and without MSX:

Actually that noise is from the visual camera/MSX. When the visible camera is blocked it turns up the gain causing you to see the sensor noise. MSX is just edge detection, so any noise in the visible camera image becomes really obvious in the combined MSX image.

If you want to not have the MSX there are 3 (easy) options:

• Cover the visible camera with some translucent tape
• Open the image with FLIR tools and turn off MSX
• Extract the thermal image directly from the radiometric jpg: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/flir-e4-thermal-imaging-camera-teardown/msg348398/#msg348398

[havaloc]

You're right.  I removed the MSX data with the tools (right on an iPhone, no less), here are the results.  Note, that the Flir Tools makes it even more useful.

Actually that noise is from the visual camera/MSX. When the visible camera is blocked it turns up the gain causing you to see the sensor noise. MSX is just edge detection, so any noise in the visible camera image becomes really obvious in the combined MSX image.

[miguelvp]

It seems the original seek doesn't do very well with closeups and those objects being out of focus makes them look pretty bad.

I did get my XR today so I took some snapshots of the oven (we had pizza tonight) with the seek software using a Galaxy S3 phone.

Oven from a distance:


A bit closer (sorry, it's sideways):


Closeup of one of the knobs (with image smoothing like the previous two):


Turning off the smoothing on the same knob:


So it's not really the sensor, sure the software could be better allowing custom ranges. But the sensor is pretty good.

I wonder how much can the newer compact (non XR) focus into objects with the wider field of view.

Also not sure why the high resolution, maybe it scales the image to the phone resolution on the capture, but having two different sizes is weird.

[frenky]

@havaloc

I have fixed comparison in this post with your new image: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/seek-vs-flir-one-g2-images/msg793375/?topicseen#msg793375
So that comparison will be more realistic...

[in.Vitro]

I wonder how much can the newer compact (non XR) focus into objects with the wider field of view.

Almost that much I made this Video a month ago and you can see the Mainboard of my PC... 

oh yes; sorry for the shaky hand :S

one more thing: YOU CAN GET MUCH CLOSER with the Seek. It has a tremendous Macro-Mode 



edit: The Image is 90° rotated ;/

[miguelvp]

I wonder how much can the newer compact (non XR) focus into objects with the wider field of view.

Almost that much I made this Video a month ago and you can see the Mainboard of my PC... 

oh yes; sorry for the shaky hand :S

one more thing: YOU CAN GET MUCH CLOSER with the Seek. It has a tremendous Macro-Mode 



edit: The Image is 90° rotated ;/

So I guess it's safe to state that unless you need the Seek Compact for distance inspection only, one should avoid the original Seek Compact and get the newer revision instead for wide angle use.

For closeup work only then the XR is a better choice, but it seems the new Compact is a good general purpose device, specially with the new added (or at least new to me) digital zoom capability the App has.

Still there is the matter of the Seek App limitations. It shouldn't be hard for them to add some range and level adjustments (contrast and brightness equivalent) instead of, or in addition to, the digital zoom feature.

[Fraser]

@Miguelvp,

Totally agree with you. The SEEK camera should be, and is, capable of producing good thermal imagery. It is the image processing and APP that lets it down. This is starting to sound like Hantek test equipment......... Nice hardware, pity about the software.

It is interesting to note that the F1G2 Android APP is also found wanting and does not make the most of the hardware.

Both SEEK and FLIR would benefit from some development focus on their APPs.

There is no doubt in my mind that a variable focus lens will far outperform a fixed focus, large depth of field, lens of the same optical element quality.

Fraser

[sgken]

[/quote]



Almost that much I made this Video a month ago and you can see the Mainboard of my PC... 

oh yes; sorry for the shaky hand :S

one more thing: YOU CAN GET MUCH CLOSER with the Seek. It has a tremendous Macro-Mode 



edit: The Image is 90° rotated ;/
[/quote]



Looks like pretty good resolution to me!

Ken

[Redshift1340]

Havaloc, thank you for posting those images  I've been looking a long time for some side by side comparisons between the F1G2 and Seek. I would love to see some outdoor distance comparisons, especially using the white hot palette on both since it seems the Seek produces more detail with that palette.  Whatever you can do at your own convenience. I really appreciate your effort, thanks again.

[havaloc]

I sold the Seek, otherwise I would take more requests. I have some other comparisons laying around and I'll post the more interesting ones. I can't imagine nor do I remember outdoor Seek shots being any better

[Redshift1340]

I sold the Seek, otherwise I would take more requests. I have some other comparisons laying around and I'll post the more interesting ones. I can't imagine nor do I remember outdoor Seek shots being any better

No problem I'd definitely be interested in seeing any other comparison shots you've taken.  Thanks a ton.

[havaloc]

1,2 - Dog - Flir and Seek
3,4 - Ceiling fan control box - Flir and Seek
5,6 - Floor - Flir and Seek

[havaloc]

1,2 - Quilt with warm phone on it just a few seconds - Flir and Seek
3,4 - Sun in door - Flir and Seek
5 - Breaker Panel shows MSX utility, Flir only
6 - Sink, shows Flir sensitivity, Flir only

[miguelvp]

That's a terrible dog image for both imagers.
As for the rest of the images it seems you are really showing way out of the focal range examples.

This is a picture I took last year on my 1st gen Seek Compact when I was standing about 5-6 feet away from the dog:



which I posted back then:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/yet-another-cheap-thermal-imager-incoming/msg534773/#msg534773

I have another picture of my other dog using the newer XR but that's at home.

[havaloc]

What do you consider good focal range for the Seek?  I'm not trying to highlight focal differences, the sensitivity though is what continues to convince me the Flir does a better job.  For example, the ceiling fan example, you don't have a choice in range unless you get out a ladder, and the Flir clearly does a better job identifying the slightly warmer box.

That's a terrible dog image for both imagers.
As for the rest of the images it seems you are really showing way out of the focal range examples.

[miguelvp]

I really don't know how you are taking those images, but here are more examples of windows and doors, from last year using the basic Seek Compact with the android app, Ignore the 2nd image which is the only one that is running my custom algorithm.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/yet-another-cheap-thermal-imager-incoming/msg552233/#msg552233

While I agree that the software could be better, the images you are showing are really really poor compared to what I've seen so far.

kitchen door, you can see my jacket hanging on a chair.


bathroom window, you can see some dispenser bottle and some cream container or something like that, not sure because they belong to the wife


bedroom window and radiator:


living room window with aluminum frame showing a reflection of a plant and myself taking the picture

[encryptededdy]

Unfortunately havaloc didn't post the radiometric JPEGs, so I can't check, but it's pretty likely that his images have a much narrower temperature span than yours. Your images all seem to have at least 20 degrees F (~10C) ranges.

Perhaps your images were taken at a different time of day where the sun heats up the windows etc. much more.

[Fraser]

Let us not forget the issues with adhesive contamination of the SEEK optics inside the lens tube. It is possible that the OP's camera was in some way compromised, producing poor images. I must say that the difference between the SEEK and F1G2 is surpringly great in this threads pictures. Based on this threads pictures it appears the F1G2 is very much better at capturing small thermal differences.

Fraser

[havaloc]

Looking back in my camera roll, images I had from earlier taken with the SEEK had better range than later ones.  Is it possible my SEEK degraded over time (or the software got worse)?  Attached is an earlier SEEK image and a newer one.  Big difference.  These are the original JPG, so perhaps they are radiometric for analysis?

Let us not forget the issues with adhesive contamination of the SEEK optics inside the lens tube. It is possible that the OP's camera was in some way compromised, producing poor images. I must say that the difference between the SEEK and F1G2 is surpringly great in this threads pictures. Based on this threads pictures it appears the F1G2 is very much better at capturing small thermal differences.

Fraser

[encryptededdy]

Are those of the same subject? If so then yeah, something's gone horribly wrong.

Perhaps the shutter is jammed?

[Redshift1340]

Are those of the same subject? If so then yeah, something's gone horribly wrong.

Perhaps the shutter is jammed?

 No, that second image is of a wall heating grate. He used it earlier with his comparison with the F1G2'on page 1.

[Fraser]

@havaloc,

Wow! Your latest post is pretty definitive. Please check your camera settings to ensure it isn't locked to maximum span. It would be worth uninstalling and re-installing the APP to see if it rectifies the issue.. If not, Your SEEK camera is sick. That isn't the result of a simple software version change. The SEEK appears to have become almost blind compared to the earlier image. I suggest you investigate having it replaced under the 'fitness for purpose' and 'reasonable life expectancy' consumer rights.

To answer you question on camera degradation over time. The microbolometer if sort of new technology compared to older and larger arrays. It is possible that the microbolometer or the optics have degraded in some way,  but neither is normally a common problem on thermal cameras.
There is a vacuum inside the microbolometer and this can be lost due to physical seal failure. Such a failure would normally just result in thermal air current issues around the pixels. To be totally honest I do not know what physical failure would cause your poor image contrast symptoms.

Fraser

[miguelvp]

On the upper right corner of those two images there is an object, maybe part of your hand. That probably helped getting higher contrast.

Also it's strange those last two images have a different resolution than the previously posted are those taken from different phones?

[encryptededdy]

On the upper right corner of those two images there is an object, maybe part of your hand. That probably helped getting higher contrast.

Also it's strange those last two images have a different resolution than the previously posted are those taken from different phones?

The Seek has a aspect ratio option, the second image was presumably taken in 16:9 mode while the 1st was in 4:3.

[the1snm]

Havaloc, thank you for posting those images  I've been looking a long time for some side by side comparisons between the F1G2 and Seek. I would love to see some outdoor distance comparisons, especially using the white hot palette on both since it seems the Seek produces more detail with that palette.  Whatever you can do at your own convenience. I really appreciate your effort, thanks again.

I too would love to see some outdoor images if anyone else has both units. I owned the Seek XR in the beginning part of this year and returned it due to poor span. I didn't know at the time that's what it was as I was a brand new thermal camera consumer and have been reading and learning as much as I can over the past 6 months before buying my next one. I have been very much interested in the Flir One G2 as a possible replacement for the Seek XR I had but always got mixed opinions. These photo's show me that for close ie indoor work the Flir One G2 seems superior. While i have a number of potential uses around the house I also have many outside in the 30-100 yards too.

Thanks in advance if someone is able to help out.
Steve

[tomas123]

I too would love to see some outdoor images if anyone else has both units.

I have only the Flir1G2:

here is a real live sample:

I saved with the SDK.app a upscaled Flir Radiometric JPG  and a real Lepton ThermalLinearFlux14BitImage.
Afterwards I rebuild with my old panorama script (see my footer) a real size 160x120 Lepton radiometric jpg.
You can load this sample jpg images in Flir Tools and compare the quality.

cropped images shot with Flir App, about 120x90 Pixel from Lepton sensor (please note the artefacts/patterns)
Flir makes a lens distortion correction of the Lepton sensor for best MSX overlaying 


real "untouched" Lepton sensor 160x120 (with noise/grain because the temperature spread is only 4 Kelvin)

[the1snm]

OK so I bought a Seek XR from Amazon and it arrived last night (could resist the drop to $225 for a new one) and heard back from Flir yesterday on my inquiry as to when Amazon would get the new Flir One in stock. Instead answering my question they told me that Apple Store should now have them in stock (explains why everyone else is still out of them since Apple probably needed 5k units minimum to load in). Armed with that information I drove to the local Apple store on lunch and bought one and it's charging right now. Now on to the purpose for my post in this thread.

Over the next couple of days I'll be doing some tests with both units to determine which one of the two I'll be keeping. I plan on doing some distance shots like I was inquiring on earlier so I'll throw those results on here as well as some assorted around the house items. If anyone has something specific they are looking for please let me know and I'll do my best to accommodate. Please bear in mind I'm no Flir expert nor am I an electrical engineer or even close. I just want to contribute something to make up for the knowledge I've taken from this site.

[Redshift1340]

Over the next couple of days I'll be doing some tests with both units to determine which one of the two I'll be keeping. I plan on doing some distance shots like I was inquiring on earlier so I'll throw those results on here as well as some assorted around the house items. If anyone has something specific they are looking for please let me know and I'll do my best to accommodate. Please bear in mind I'm no Flir expert nor am I an electrical engineer or even close. I just want to contribute something to make up for the knowledge I've taken from this site.

Thanks for taking the time to do this comparison.  I would really like to see some outdoors comparisons with both using the white hot palette and without MSX.  I would really like to see if the seek's extra pixel count can make up for the F1G2's better sensitivity and lack of noise when it comes to the overall image quality.  I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with:)

[havaloc]

Another comparison has popped up on the internet.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/11/23/thermal-imaging-camera-review-for-energy-efficiency-work-flir-one-vs-seek/

[the1snm]

Thanks for taking the time to do this comparison.  I would really like to see some outdoors comparisons with both using the white hot palette and without MSX.  I would really like to see if the seek's extra pixel count can make up for the F1G2's better sensitivity and lack of noise when it comes to the overall image quality.  I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with:)

I didn't see your post till after I started some testing but I can try and whip another quick round up if this doesn't help answer your questions. I started the first night taking some quick images around the house. These first show the difference in my house, where the Flir found a nice clear cold spot in a corner and a poorly insulated light fixture the Seek struggled. The second images are a quick shot in my garage with the doors closed and lights out. The cars have been off for hours at this point.










These next images are of my dog in the backyard doing well what dogs do in the backyard. Distance in the pics is approximately 20 yards give or take. Both did fairly well here in detecting the key objects.







These next couple of shots were taken while my son and I were hunting and he was sitting in a tree stand a short distance away about 12-15 yards. Right around dawn he started getting approached by an unknowing squirrel who eventually got in the tree above him and nearly ran face to face with him. I include it to show the Flir's ability to detect small objects at distance. I didn't pull the Seek out for these tests as I had no reason to doubt it's capability at this distance and temperature span.





These next series of shots are the meat and potatoes of the distance tests between the 2 units. My son was about 150 yards or more from me and was facing me for these tests. As you can see the Flir One was able to see him but not really able to pick up his heat signature well. Sometimes he would blip on the screen but not often. I tried several different color pallets here to see if one was better than the other. The Seek was able to spot him better with some tweaking. First it was important to get the focus just right or it would be like he wasn't there. Next to get him to stand out I needed to use the Seek's high pass filter for a lack of a better name and set the threshold of temps to something like 60 degrees. When you do this though you really do lose the ability to see any other side detail. This is a feature I REALLY do wish the Flir One had especially with the MSX blending. It may be able to do this with the Lock Span option but I've not been able to get it to work well yet.











At the end of the day even though the Flir One doesn't have the distance capability which is a rather high importance piece of my desire for one of these all of the other things the Flir One does better just trump the Seek in my book. Even without the MSX the vastly superior sensitivity of the Flir One over the Seek makes it more useful all around. A great example of that is the picture showing the cold spot in my corner. When I looked for things like this with the Seek previously it was so muted like in the example above that it didn't even stand out. The Flir One has it there clear as day.

[Redshift1340]

The1snm, Thanks a ton for taking your time to do that comparison.  It was very helpful to hear your observations.  It's not too surprising the Seek XR did better on the long distance detection tests considering it has a narrow view zoom lens, but I'd have to agree that the FLIR consistently has a better image in most cases even without the benefit of MSX. If it's not too much trouble I would really like to see a comparison of something outdoors with good temp range and some hard edges (like the front of a house or a hot car or engine) in the white hot palette on both cameras and without MSX.  I keep seeing pretty impressive images being posted with the Seek that seem MUCH better than the majority of other Seek images like this one...

https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xta1/t51.2885-15/s640x640/sh0.08/e35/12142431_520619004782584_2144804393_n.jpg

And I want to see if the Seek really can produce that quality of an image and if so, how does the FLIR compare when viewing the same thing.  Thanks again for your help!

[encryptededdy]

I keep seeing pretty impressive images being posted with the Seek that seem MUCH better than the majority of other Seek images like this one...

https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xta1/t51.2885-15/s640x640/sh0.08/e35/12142431_520619004782584_2144804393_n.jpg

And I want to see if the Seek really can produce that quality of an image and if so, how does the FLIR compare when viewing the same thing.  Thanks again for your help!

It's likely that that image was taken in very ideal conditions (hot day = very hot car with lots of thermal contrast)

[the1snm]

I'll see what I can do tomorrow getting some more images for you. Regarding that link sent I'm a little dubious at first since it's such high detail and even the shadows stand out on the background. It almost looks like an image was converted to look like this. I've never seen anywhere near this kind of clarity on either of the 2 cameras.


Sent from my iPhone

[Redshift1340]

I'll see what I can do tomorrow getting some more images for you. Regarding that link sent I'm a little dubious at first since it's such high detail and even the shadows stand out on the background. It almost looks like an image was converted to look like this. I've never seen anywhere near this kind of clarity on either of the 2 cameras.


Sent from my iPhone

Thanks, I really appreciate it:) yeah I thought the same thing.  It was posted on Seek's website on their community page though.  There also was another image posted that was framed a little different to where you could see more of the truck and in the iron palette.
https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xaf1/t51.2885-15/s640x640/sh0.08/e35/12139870_1694730324092320_578038826_n.jpg
  If it was faked, it seems wierd to go through the trouble of faking two.  But it's definitely possible. There are others, like these...
https://youtu.be/g8B8Pr_WsuY
https://youtu.be/EkUwo2PTd28
https://media.getstorybox.com/v_3967c1f6-db99-46d8-9c1f-492da679ce10.jpg
https://media.getstorybox.com/v_37fd416d-7039-4a39-9a89-26ef4aa78df9.jpg
that are significantly better quality than most and encryptededdy is probably right that it's down to a high range of temperature.

[encryptededdy]

Yeah, temperature and humidity can make a huge difference. Here is a example from my Therm-App showing dramatic differences looking at the same subject

This image was taken at night after a cold overcast day. Also very humid = the moisture in the air blocks a lot of IR light.


Whereas this image was taken in evening after a very hot and sunny day (ground stores a lot of heat). Dry weather also meant less IR light is blocked.

[ralphd]

Im not impressed with Seek's 3.6 update for Android requiring permission to access call information.  Skipped the update for now, but more reason to switch to Cyanogen so I can restrict app permissions.

[Redshift1340]

Encryptededdy, yeah that's quite a difference.  I'm actually surprised the therm-app got that much detail out of a 3 degree Span on that first image.  Makes me want the therm-app even more haha.  So if the Seek can get an image of the quality of the ones I posted with a wide thermal span, I'm really interested to see what the F1G2 can produce when compared side by side looking at the same thing.  Because in those two videos taken in the cars for instance, the white hot filter on the Seek seems surprisingly detailed and I haven't been able to get anything that good out of my F1G2.  Seeing images like that made me wonder if I maybe should have bought the Seek.  Regardless, I am still very happy with my F1G2

[encryptededdy]

You'll never be satisfied with the one you have . The "Other" one will always appear better.

I suspect those Seek images were probably taken on a hot sunny day, which would heat the inside of the car pretty dramatically.

FWIW here's another video from the Therm-App in a parking lot.



Don't switch from the FLIR One to the Seek, if you want to replace it, then replace it with a Therm-App or perhaps the new i3-ThermalExpert which will hopefully come in at a lower price than the Therm-App.

That said, Therm-App say they're going to have a black friday sale on their website - so keep an eye out for that!

[Redshift1340]

Encryptededdy, yeah the grass is always greener I suppose  . I agree, I'll be keeping the FLIR regardless. thanks for the heads up on the Black Friday deal!  I've wanted to get the Therm-app for a while (or a modded e4) but can't swing $1,000 right now unfortunately.  It produces a great image at that price point.  But I did have my eye on the i3 ThermalExpert too and I hope it comes in closer to $500 than a grand.  I thought it was supposed to be released in late October but I haven't heard anything about a new release date, I hope it's soon though.  Since you own the Therm-app, I was wondering, I've noticed that the Therm-app seems to produce a dark halo around hot subjects in the image that doesn't seem to be representative of actual temperature.  I heard in one owners video notice it and think it was heat coming off of a persons body heating the air around them, but that seems laughable to me as it was showing up around things like trees, etc. Do you know why that is?  I'm curious to know if it's common in microbolometers or considered a negative attribute to the Therm-app.  It's pretty apparent here in this video around the palm trees.
http://youtu.be/kBq6ixmVcCk

[encryptededdy]

That effect is common in Microbolometers with a BST sensor, however what's going on in the Therm-App is completely different (The therm-app doesn't use a BST sensor).

That artifact is a result of using the stock Therm-App app in "Night Vision" mode. This mode works to use image processing to exaggerate temperature differences for a more detailed image at night. Sometimes the image enhancement goes a bit overboard and causes the halo. However I think this is on purpose and can be useful as if you had, say, a warm person on a background with only slightly lower temperature, it would be very hard to see the person. However, with the image processing, the slightly warmer person will have a black halo around it which makes them much easier to detect.

Personally I use the "ThermAppPlus" app on the Play store, which has other image processing enhancements for lower noise (as I generally use the Therm-App for thermography), however I guess the night vision mode in the stock app results in increased detail.

I'll post a comparison soon.

[Redshift1340]

Encryptededdy, thanks for clearing that up for me.  The therm-app's detail is incredible for its cost, it's too bad the Black Friday deal was only for shipping   I guess I'll have to wait a bit longer and see how the ThermalExperts stacks up with it. 
Another thing I've noticed specifically with the Therm-app is when the camera is moved around, like in your parking lot video, there is a screen-tearing effect that makes it look like its underwater.  Does that get annoying for you or do you get used to it?  I do notice the effect isn't present or at least as noticeable on the 25hz model.  I wonder if it's to do with reducing the frame rate to 9hz on the base model and if it's something that can be addressed in software.

[encryptededdy]

Encryptededdy, thanks for clearing that up for me.  The therm-app's detail is incredible for its cost, it's too bad the Black Friday deal was only for shipping   I guess I'll have to wait a bit longer and see how the ThermalExperts stacks up with it. 
Another thing I've noticed specifically with the Therm-app is when the camera is moved around, like in your parking lot video, there is a screen-tearing effect that makes it look like its underwater.  Does that get annoying for you or do you get used to it?  I do notice the effect isn't present or at least as noticeable on the 25hz model.  I wonder if it's to do with reducing the frame rate to 9hz on the base model and if it's something that can be addressed in software.

You get used to it, but I don't really use it for Night Vision so I can't really comment on that.

It's due to how they reduce the frame rate to 9Hz - Cameras like the FLIR One or FLIR E4 read out at 30fps then drop frames to get 9 fps.

The Therm-App reads out at 9fps, therefore taking 1/9 of a second to scan the whole sensor, thus leading to the jello effect. Personally I would much prefer it if they read out at 30fps then just dropped frames, however they claim that this way you're less likely to miss something (as everything being read from the sensor is displayed). I guess that's technically correct, but it certainly looks ugly.

[in.Vitro]

Guys, I have a Problem with my flir one 

I bought this baby yesterday, charched it and it worked well! but today as i unplugged it from the power brik it wont turn on 

does anybody knows if there is a "lock"-mode on this device?


edit: when I plug it on the power brick, the green indicator-light stays dark

[Fraser]

Answered in your OTHER post asking this same question.