SEEK vs Flir One G2 Images

[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.