Howdy all,
Saw this on Engadget.com and thought of us:
http://www.rpi.edu/~bradfe/NVG2.html
hope it can help somebody! :new_thumbsupsmileyanim:
vlandrum
Full Version: Cool Infrared Homebuilt Device
That was pretty neat, however, I would not call it an IR unit. To me IR detects heat and needs no external illumination (see below). This is a night vision device, not an IR device. Or am I wrong about this? Anyway, it was still a neat site.
Yes,It is a night vision device not an IR device.It is still pretty cool though.I would like to know the total cost
of the device or did I miss it in the article?If it more than about a hundred and 25 it is not very cost effective.
of the device or did I miss it in the article?If it more than about a hundred and 25 it is not very cost effective.
QUOTE(glendoor42 @ Feb 23 2006, 07:10 PM) 
Yes,It is a night vision device not an IR device.It is still pretty cool though.I would like to know the total cost
of the device or did I miss it in the article?If it more than about a hundred and 25 it is not very cost effective.
of the device or did I miss it in the article?If it more than about a hundred and 25 it is not very cost effective.
I think the guy spent about $35 on it.
Yep, I read something like $30.
It is all ‘IR’; just different wavelengths and sources of IR.
Just for perspective, visible light falls into an approximate range of 0.7 ~ 0.4 um (um = 1/1,000,000 of a meter).
IR LEDs have a wavelength typically around 0.9 um. These LEDs are used in consumer audio/visual remote controls (TVs, etc.) and also ‘nite vision’ products, such as the Sony Nightshot and others. In these ‘nite vision’ products the CCD element is sensitive not only to visible light, but also the IR spectrum to a limited degree; but sufficient to ‘see’ the 0.9 um IR. The camera has a ‘built-in’ LED IR source that it uses to illuminate the subject in 0.9 um IR.
Naturally-occurring ‘biological’ IR that is radiated from warm-blooded animals is in the 9.0 um range, which is a wavelength about ten-times longer than the LED IR. Due to this difference in wavelength, video cameras such as a Sony Nightshot cannot see ‘animal-generated’ IR.
Sam
Just for perspective, visible light falls into an approximate range of 0.7 ~ 0.4 um (um = 1/1,000,000 of a meter).
IR LEDs have a wavelength typically around 0.9 um. These LEDs are used in consumer audio/visual remote controls (TVs, etc.) and also ‘nite vision’ products, such as the Sony Nightshot and others. In these ‘nite vision’ products the CCD element is sensitive not only to visible light, but also the IR spectrum to a limited degree; but sufficient to ‘see’ the 0.9 um IR. The camera has a ‘built-in’ LED IR source that it uses to illuminate the subject in 0.9 um IR.
Naturally-occurring ‘biological’ IR that is radiated from warm-blooded animals is in the 9.0 um range, which is a wavelength about ten-times longer than the LED IR. Due to this difference in wavelength, video cameras such as a Sony Nightshot cannot see ‘animal-generated’ IR.
Sam
QUOTE(Sam Farris @ Feb 24 2006, 11:58 AM)
It is all ‘IR’; just different wavelengths and sources of IR.
Just for perspective, visible light falls into an approximate range of 0.7 ~ 0.4 um (um = 1/1,000,000 of a meter).
IR LEDs have a wavelength typically around 0.9 um. These LEDs are used in consumer audio/visual remote controls (TVs, etc.) and also ‘nite vision’ products, such as the Sony Nightshot and others. In these ‘nite vision’ products the CCD element is sensitive not only to visible light, but also the IR spectrum to a limited degree; but sufficient to ‘see’ the 0.9 um IR. The camera has a ‘built-in’ LED IR source that it uses to illuminate the subject in 0.9 um IR.
Naturally-occurring ‘biological’ IR that is radiated from warm-blooded animals is in the 9.0 um range, which is a wavelength about ten-times longer than the LED IR. Due to this difference in wavelength, video cameras such as a Sony Nightshot cannot see ‘animal-generated’ IR.
Sam
Just for perspective, visible light falls into an approximate range of 0.7 ~ 0.4 um (um = 1/1,000,000 of a meter).
IR LEDs have a wavelength typically around 0.9 um. These LEDs are used in consumer audio/visual remote controls (TVs, etc.) and also ‘nite vision’ products, such as the Sony Nightshot and others. In these ‘nite vision’ products the CCD element is sensitive not only to visible light, but also the IR spectrum to a limited degree; but sufficient to ‘see’ the 0.9 um IR. The camera has a ‘built-in’ LED IR source that it uses to illuminate the subject in 0.9 um IR.
Naturally-occurring ‘biological’ IR that is radiated from warm-blooded animals is in the 9.0 um range, which is a wavelength about ten-times longer than the LED IR. Due to this difference in wavelength, video cameras such as a Sony Nightshot cannot see ‘animal-generated’ IR.
Sam
Yes, that is true, but even a first and second generation night vision device can see in the dark with out using LED IR illumination. They work by magnifying ambient light ,light that is in the visible spectrum ,there is just not that much of it. Or I could be completely wrong ,but I believe that is what they told me at soldier school. Gen three and four work in the near infrared spectrum. Any of these devices and most do use a IR illuminator.
If I am completely wrong it won't be the first time.To your credit Sam ,I have never seen you post near
about anything that I thought was incorrect. Not kissing your ass just stating a fact,or more rightly my opinion.
QUOTE(glendoor42 @ Feb 24 2006, 05:19 PM)
Yes, that is true, but even a first and second generation night vision device can see in the dark with out using LED IR illumination.
You are correct. What you speak of are 'light amplification' based products.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys.../ground/nvg.htm
I was referring only to IR based-products as mentioned in this thread. I see now how what I meant and how what I said could be interpreted differently. My assumption was that the difference between IR and light amplification products was a 'known'.
My bad.... :doh:
The topic-starting linked article describes how to add 'Nightshot'-like function to any video camera that does not have that capability. My intent was to point out how this mod mimics 'Nightshot' capability and how these differ from a much more sophisticated system that actually detects the IR given off by warm body subjects. A good example of these sophisticated IR systems are those used by aerial enforcement officers to detect pot-growing houses or a nighttime fleeing suspect that tries to hide.
Sam
Yeah, I think we are both right. Sorry I misunderstood what you meant. What the kid was remove the IR filter from the device that allowed it to see in the IR spectrum. The first Sony's with this capability could supposedly see through clothes using the night shot feature. Saw it tested, sort of worked.
Any way you look at it though, that was a pretty imaginative kid that figured this out.
Any way you look at it though, that was a pretty imaginative kid that figured this out.
QUOTE(glendoor42 @ Feb 25 2006, 11:31 AM)
Yeah, I think we are both right. Sorry I misunderstood what you meant. What the kid was remove the IR filter from the device that allowed it to see in the IR spectrum. The first Sony's with this capability could supposedly see through clothes using the night shot feature. Saw it tested, sort of worked.
Any way you look at it though, that was a pretty imaginative kid that figured this out.
Any way you look at it though, that was a pretty imaginative kid that figured this out.
Here is some more info on the 'see-through' capability.
http://www.kaya-optics.com/devices/sony_nightshot.shtml
Sam
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.