IR & FLIR

IR & FLIR

J
J

April 10th, 2011, 6:25 am #1

I remember years ago when IR cameras began to come down in price where the average researcher could buy one. There has been some debate that IR is pretty useless in the field due to foliage & growth in the woods. IR game cameras have not produced much either with a few shots now and then raising eyebrows but nothing conclusive.

These days FLIR is coming down in price and a few researchers have access to them, in time they will probably be priced low enough that the average researcher could own one. We are now beginning to see some thermal images trickle into the field.

Here is the question:

Do you think FLIR will be any better at recording a Bigfoot than IR is/was? Is there an advantage to having a FLIR in the field? Or is it yet another waste of money?

I believe that no photo or video will ever prove the existence of Bigfoot so I'm not asking if it would. I believe most agree a photo/video is not proof. What I am asking is if FLIR is useful to the researcher in their own discovery of the creature? Do you think it would help you or is it just another technology that ultimately will not render any useful results?

What is your opinion of IR cameras and FLIR cameras as a tool for Bigfoot researchers?

J.
Quote
Share

D. Fisher
D. Fisher

April 10th, 2011, 7:41 pm #2

I dont think you could use flir recorded signitures for anything as far as proof of bigfoot.
The only thing I would use it for would be to locate the critter in the dark for a possible shot.

I know there their I've seen them I need no proof for myself. But in the hunt situation one could be of use for locating purposes.

On nights that I used IR nothing happened. Nights I didnt we had fun.
Quote
Share

Lone Wolf
Lone Wolf

April 10th, 2011, 8:08 pm #3

I remember years ago when IR cameras began to come down in price where the average researcher could buy one. There has been some debate that IR is pretty useless in the field due to foliage & growth in the woods. IR game cameras have not produced much either with a few shots now and then raising eyebrows but nothing conclusive.

These days FLIR is coming down in price and a few researchers have access to them, in time they will probably be priced low enough that the average researcher could own one. We are now beginning to see some thermal images trickle into the field.

Here is the question:

Do you think FLIR will be any better at recording a Bigfoot than IR is/was? Is there an advantage to having a FLIR in the field? Or is it yet another waste of money?

I believe that no photo or video will ever prove the existence of Bigfoot so I'm not asking if it would. I believe most agree a photo/video is not proof. What I am asking is if FLIR is useful to the researcher in their own discovery of the creature? Do you think it would help you or is it just another technology that ultimately will not render any useful results?

What is your opinion of IR cameras and FLIR cameras as a tool for Bigfoot researchers?

J.
FLIR will never be proof of BF.
In all the footage I have seen, there is no way to know exactly WHAT it is you are looking at.
It can easily be faked....

However as to your question, I believe the FLIR would be beneficial to see where a BF was walking, then look for tracks, hair or other physical evidence.

Also proof of frequency of a particular area if multiple images are captured at different times.

LW
Quote
Share

SAsquatcher
SAsquatcher

April 11th, 2011, 4:36 am #4

I remember years ago when IR cameras began to come down in price where the average researcher could buy one. There has been some debate that IR is pretty useless in the field due to foliage & growth in the woods. IR game cameras have not produced much either with a few shots now and then raising eyebrows but nothing conclusive.

These days FLIR is coming down in price and a few researchers have access to them, in time they will probably be priced low enough that the average researcher could own one. We are now beginning to see some thermal images trickle into the field.

Here is the question:

Do you think FLIR will be any better at recording a Bigfoot than IR is/was? Is there an advantage to having a FLIR in the field? Or is it yet another waste of money?

I believe that no photo or video will ever prove the existence of Bigfoot so I'm not asking if it would. I believe most agree a photo/video is not proof. What I am asking is if FLIR is useful to the researcher in their own discovery of the creature? Do you think it would help you or is it just another technology that ultimately will not render any useful results?

What is your opinion of IR cameras and FLIR cameras as a tool for Bigfoot researchers?

J.
IR uses emitters to acquire an image in the infrared light range.
FLiR picks up on heat which registers as Infrared radiation, or in other words
It sees heat.
My choice is FLIR because I believe the monsters can see the IR emitters like a flashlight as most nocturnal
animals can.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 11th, 2011, 12:49 pm #5

I remember years ago when IR cameras began to come down in price where the average researcher could buy one. There has been some debate that IR is pretty useless in the field due to foliage & growth in the woods. IR game cameras have not produced much either with a few shots now and then raising eyebrows but nothing conclusive.

These days FLIR is coming down in price and a few researchers have access to them, in time they will probably be priced low enough that the average researcher could own one. We are now beginning to see some thermal images trickle into the field.

Here is the question:

Do you think FLIR will be any better at recording a Bigfoot than IR is/was? Is there an advantage to having a FLIR in the field? Or is it yet another waste of money?

I believe that no photo or video will ever prove the existence of Bigfoot so I'm not asking if it would. I believe most agree a photo/video is not proof. What I am asking is if FLIR is useful to the researcher in their own discovery of the creature? Do you think it would help you or is it just another technology that ultimately will not render any useful results?

What is your opinion of IR cameras and FLIR cameras as a tool for Bigfoot researchers?

J.
FLIR with a recorder and an eye piece would be my choice...a FLIR monitor for viewing what you are looking for emits light...what you are seeing can clearly see you...this is something to remember when people have video using a FLIR device with a monitor and not an eye piece for viewing and recording...

IR is useless in thickets...reflection of foliage is like using a flash light...open timber the IR assisted device works pretty good...I'm not real sure if a Monster can see in the IR light spectrum but think it is possible knowing from video that some animals are capable of seeing the IR light...

Game cameras using IR instead of flash...we have discussed what needs to be done with the cameras before put in the field...what has been explained here works...a camera flash in a dark area looks like a lightning strike...the IR cameras have a dim red glow when activated at night, mine do, that can be seen but it's not a bright obtrusive flash...

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 11th, 2011, 1:20 pm #6

I dont think you could use flir recorded signitures for anything as far as proof of bigfoot.
The only thing I would use it for would be to locate the critter in the dark for a possible shot.

I know there their I've seen them I need no proof for myself. But in the hunt situation one could be of use for locating purposes.

On nights that I used IR nothing happened. Nights I didnt we had fun.
If you are interested in using NV and can't afford a quality set buy yourself an IR spot light and 100 dollar Gen 1 set...the difference in the NV other then clarity is the lite gathered...if you can't afford the IR spot lite or NV buy a red lens cover...sure you can see the lite but I doubt you're going to sneak up on a Monster to begin with...
Quote
Like
Share