Here in Ontario we are beginning to take cougar sightings seriously (I work with the Ministry of Natural Resources). Below I took an extract out of our strategy which talks about FLIR cameras. In regards to bf, we hear of folks talking about areas where there appears to be a substantial population. Two southern BF forums come to mind and no doubt there are more where we would be lead to believe they see these animals all of the time. They also tell us they can't be photographed, one would have to be harvested to prove their existence...on and on. Technology has advanced to the point where it would be quite easy to prove the existence of bf if a group had the means to afford an FLIR detection project. Perhaps that's what we should be all concentrating on? Especially from the southern parts of America where it appears FLIR could really work?

Use of Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) to detect cougars:
If sufficient funding is secured a FLIR camera will be purchased and used in an aircraft to detect cougars in areas of southern Ontario with numerous verified cougar sightings. The sensitivity of the FLIR camera is such that an image can be portrayed on a monitor that can be verified as cougar. The camera also records the image and UTMC location. FLIR does not work that well in the north due to the frequency of coniferous trees; however, it may work in the agricultural regions of southern Ontario.

t.

Thermal imagers of different kinds would be very useful. But they are very expensive for amateur use.

A couple years ago I was doing some research on night and thermal imagers for possible rental use by the BFRO.

Where the purchase price of a Gen III night vision monocular was getting down close to $3,000 back then, a thermal camera model I looked at, like you see used in Ghost Hunters on Sci Fi channel, was $14,000.

I have no idea what a FLIR would cost. I bet it's like what the lawyer in Jurassic Park said, "If it's heavy, it's expensive."

I'm curious. Why wouldn't a FLIR work in a coniferous forest? Do those trees block IR more efficiently than deciduous ones?

Are you saying they cost $14k just to rent!?!

Nope. That was purchase price. Apologies for not making that clearer.

One company was a tad interested in maybe renting Gen III night viewers, but didn't seem so keen on renting their thermal imagers, presumably because of the replacement cost if broken.

Don't know if the BFRO ever followed up on the rental route after I passed on the info I found.

It may be worth some organization's time to do some more research on the possibility of buying/renting thermal imagers. Two years is a long time in the electronics field. Availability and cost may be more reasonable today.

You can rent them directly from FLIR now, but they don't say how much. As my momma used to say, if you have to ask, you probably can't afford it...but I just have to ask! I want that thing they use on Ghost Hunters. I don't know what model that is. Maybe I should just say "the one like they gots on that Ghost Hunters show" ans see how far I get.

Actually, $14,000 isn't an outrageous price for a piece of equipment like that. It's certainly within the realm of possibility for a group of serious researchers to purchase.

It would certainly more than pay for itself if it resulted in any halfway decent footage.

I totally agree. Can you use your Visa?

Even if I split the cost among ten guys, it'd still be too rich for my blood. I'll have to stick to the poor man's night imager/recorder - a cheap Sony camcorder with Nightshot with attached IR hand lamp.

But if you've got the dough to blow, I'd certainly go for it. Or get your own t.v. series and have the Sci Fi channel pay for it. I imagine the Ghost Hunters, being Roto Rooter guys, probably have some extra income coming in to pay for all of those black vans and electronic equipment; they don't charge for their investigations.

I wonder if there are police departments across the country who are looking to surplus their older thermal imagers as they upgrade. I assume law enforcement uses these things; I know they use helicopter mounted ones (those may even be FLIRs from the look of their images on tv), so them having hand helds would make sense too.

I've contacted FLIR for some rental pricing info. I'll post it here when I hear back.

Here's their rental site: http://www.infraredcamerarentals.com/

I guess it depends on how 'professional' one considers oneself to be (in the sense of 'serious', if not in the sense of 'getting paid good money'). $14,000 for a piece of equipment for a professional is not really that much, and for scientific equipment, it's frankly peanuts.

Obviously $14,000 is a big chunk of money for an individual, but just in the general scheme of how much scientific organizations spend on equipment, $14,000 isn't much, and there are people that spend far more than that on frivolous things like cars, or other hobbies.


I'm not sure where i'm going with this other than to say that if a group is really serious about getting footage of a Sasquatch, and when it really comes down to it, thinks they are genuinely having encounters, then $14,000 shouldn't seem crazy. It isn't hard to borrow $14,000, especially if that is spread out over a number of people, and again, when it comes down to it, if you really believe you are close to filming an actual Sasquatch, why _wouldn't_ you invest in it?


That, and you can almost certainly insure the equipment, and sell it if it turns out that all those mysterious noises in the dark were racoons


Of course, i say this sitting in my apartment a thousand miles away from any Sasquatch research activity, but i think it raises a serious question. If you balk at risking a significant sum of money on the chance that your research isn't all a wild goose chase, then deep down, do you really believe you are chasing a real animal?

I think there are many in this field who spend a lot more than $14k on this, they just don't do it all at once. Whether or not someone's able or comfortable dropping that kind of scratch on a piece of equipment doesn't really equate with how much someone really believes they're chasing a real animal, IMO.

And I know of one serious 'squatcher who, though he can afford otherwise, chooses to go low tech. Still camera, hiking boots and a pair of eyes.

I guess i didn't phrase that last bit well. Not so much, then, whether one believes the animal is real, but whether the 'close encounters' etc that one so often hears reported from various expeditions really are what it is implied that they are. If one was strongly convinced that they had repeatedly come close to a sasquatch in the dark, and a $14,000 piece of equipment would permit clear viewing and videotaping of said sasquatch, then it would seem like a no brainer to obtain that piece of equipment by whatever means possible.

I think it is kind of a test, in a crude sense, of how intellectually honest any group is being when they report likely Sasquatch encounters on an expedition. If you think you are really having close encounters, and the evidence is strong, then $14,000 is a worthwhile investment. If $14,000 seems like too much, then it calls for a careful examination of how much of what is being reported is wishful thinking or exaggeration.

BTW - i'm not referring to any particular group, but just my memory of the many 'expedition reports' i've read in the last few years. Frequently there is an 'encounter', and it's reported that for various reasons it seems to be a very large animal, probably not a bear or elk, etc. the implication being that it is likely some unknown animal. The availability of a FLIR device at a not-unattainable cost sort of calls the bluff on such suggestive reports.

FWIW, the BFRO is employing thermal now...

Honestly though, would even a 'great' video taken via FLIR do the job of providing proof that bigfoot is actually walking among us? I really don't think so.

JMO

I've been thinking about that. I suppose the same old crowd would dismiss anything, but you'd actually see heat as opposed something like what Patterson filmed. It would be supremely easy to put a guy in a gorilla suit and compare heat signatures. Dollars to donuts the real bigfoot would look a hell of a lot different.

Of course, I know it still wouldn't be enough because someone would say it's a suit that simulates a real heat signature in the same way Patterson's "suit" simulated muscle movement and flexible feet.

But if their body temp. was comparable to ours, with a thermal image how would you be able to tell the difference between a person and a Bigfoot anyway?

I think you'd be able to see if any exposed skin was real or part of a costume. Face, hands, possibly chest...

A costume would probably be the same cool temperature everywhere, since it would probably insulate most of the heat coming from the person inside. In fact, i'd bet that a person in a suit would barely register brighter than the trees on an infrared camera.

Ok ..I'll buy that.. but then how would it, if that's the case differ from a guy in a jeans and a t-shirt that's changing the heat signature to match a similar diffusion from fur or body hair?

I think with IR images you can make out the same stuff you can see with visible light, at least to some extent. So you'd be able to see the clothing etc, although it might appear semi-transparent. You'd definitely see the difference between a person wearing clothes and a hairy upright ape, and probably also between either of those and a person in a fur suit and rubber mask.

And here's a link to a site with links to many thermal imaging units: http://www.infrared-cameras.org/

The site for the IR 235 includes the following caption under one of its images:

A couple examples. I think it would be almost impossible to fake an image like this, especially on video:



And here you can see how clothing shows up:



Indeed, if one was able to get a clear video of a Sasqutach using an infrared sensor, I think it would be much stronger evidence than a daylight video of the same quality, because the heat would be incredibly hard to fake. I think it would cause a lot of scientists and other experts to take a serious look at it, when they might dismiss a daylight video out of hand - another reason i think a good FLIR camera hooked up to a video recorder would be a fantastic research tool.


It would be great if somebody working here had an interest in, or at least an eye out for Sasquatch.

Here's a page from a company in Oregon that specializes in arial FLIR wildlife surveying: http://www.visionairresearch.com/geo-referenced_gallery.htm

It actually makes me a bit concerned that the haven't spotted a Sasquatch with a tool like this.

Thanks for the info Robin. Now if I only had 14g's to pony up.

Heh.. well, Roger linked to one that is 'only' about $9,000, and i'm sure prices will drop. Ten years ago good digital cameras cost thousands.

I'm really curious as to what Bipto finds out about the rentals..

I think what's most interesting here is, we as a bigfoot community, would require more proof of what they're seeing. Hense, FLIR would not be enough to verify any thing.

While very interesting, where's the proof (up close picture, body, hair... ) of what they saw thru their high tech gear?

Are they assuming that's a bear? Then again, I'm sure they know more than I. I can make out the moose, but not with certainly.... but that bear... maybe it's a cow?

Ok, ok, probably not a cow, but the premise still stands... without a class A viewing upon FLIR capturing an image... you might as well call it a vocalization.

But yeah... FLIR technology would be fun to have in the field. I think it would pick up more blobs fom the air, but it would be the lucky SOG on the ground that could substantiate anything... and that's a haystack.

I actually have a suit like that in my closet. I bought it from a couple of out of work Rodeo Cowboys.

For me, Thermal Imaging would be used as a tool to find and identify one so it could be harvested. I'll get the video images of it after that.

I got an out-of-office reply to my web form. The guy's on vacation until 8/7.

I would think a man in a suit would look dramatically different from a real animal. Even something as thin as a cotton shirt alters a humans heat sig. I've worked with a thermal camera on expeditions before, but I've never seen anything. Well, I saw a deer. And, since I couldn't see it without the thermal camera, they are a useful tool.

I got a response from a different guy. I told them I wanted a camera that was portable, reasonably rugged, and had video out or could record its own video. George from FLIR sent this to me this morning:



Here's a picture of the Ex320:



Here's their product page for it.

I noticed on their website it says new customers get two weeks for the price of one on their first rental. They also recommend insurance since the replacement costs are so high. They don't offer it, but will provide info about those who do. Also, they'll credit the cost of the rental if you decide to buy one.

So, there you have it. Wanna take a thermal on your next sasquatch outing? Thousand bucks. Done.

Some cool images from FLIR's website:

Footprints. Now you seem 'em.


Now you don't.

Can't possibly imagine what we'd do with something like that!

Guy hiding around corner.


The guy with the camera is also hiding around a corner...


A dude hiding in a tree.


Oh look, there's some bushes...



There's something in there...

Good information!!!
I think that a big part of a good detection project would be an FLIR associated with an aircraft...even a hot air balloon over an "active" area. The big issue of course is money and that would take an organization or a wealthy and interested participant.
I've always thought that it will be technology that solves this issue for most of us. The bs'ers and their forums will continue to tell us they see them on their property all the time, even after tech. proves there is no such thing as a bf. That's the way it goes I guess.

t.

Good stuff bipto.

Resolution for this model isn't too great, but for looking for something crouching in the bushes I can see this being very useful.

It seems like a good start... 320x240 isn't much though, unless you can get close..

here's Patty at that resolution, in black and white:

During the "Louisiana Hunt" back in early 2003 one of the GCBRO guys (a dentist from OKC) was up in a ~12' deerstand tower with a thermal imager (w/supposed 800 yard range) the GCBRO management had apparently "borrowed" from a source out of California. Shortly after "the shot" by the sniper boy the imager operator (~500 yards away) reported on the radio he'd picked up the signature of something coming up out of the creek bottom from that vicinity. He gave a very detailed "play by play" description with comments such as "it's walking upright...now, it's in quad mode...it stumbled...it's lying/kneeling down, etc." and a couple of guys were (allegedly) in position to intercept it at a fireline road. Unfortunately, just as it got within a few yards of the road the batteries went down for several minutes until a senior GCBRO member showed up in the stand with fresh batteries and began operating the device. Then, he reported it was just a "false alarm" as the creature now simply became a "log" giving off latent heat. This was at ~23:30 hours in ~26 degree (fahrenheit) temps but only "one" log in that particular pine thicket was registering a heat signature?

The rest is murky as Washington politics.

Well, Telehnay's g'son, .......

It rather funny that you always seem to pop up on a message board, that hasn't banned you yet, to spread more of your vicious lies. When are you going to stop lying about things that you were never a part of. You consistently tell that story on various message boards with the same results. It's bullcrap, everybody knows it's bullcrap, and YOU know it's bullcrap.

Do you think that telling this story is supposed to make you look good. It doesn't. People just laugh at you.

You always seem to leave out the part of the story where you blindly shot into a bush (after supposedly hearing a noise, which by the way, was probably an armadillo ) with a shotgun, without even making sure what it was you were shooting at. But according to you it was a bigfoot. You wouldn't know what a bigfoot was even if it jumped out and bit you in the ass!!!

First, my reason for posting was to give everyone a first person account of how thermal imagery apparently works in a real life type situation. There were 10-12 people with radios that evening and everyone heard the same comments from the TI operator so it's not a state secret or anything.

I don't know this Pywacket person much less if he was an actual participant of that event.

However, it does sound like he has a personal problem with me so to that end rather than engage him from the relative safety of cyberspace listed below is my contact info so he can get directions to come meet me FTF and resolve his problem.

John Phillips

Take it up via PM or drop it!

While we are talking about something to think about, the thermal imaging application has benefits and disadvantages. I was trained for both handheld and airborne application for law enforcement purposes. Used it for 8 years detecting 'thermal anomaly' (narcotics investigations) and tactical circumstances (locating fugitives).

There are idiosyncracies to this technology, but it is actually pretty basic. It is the way to go if you are trying to locate someone without giving up your approach. It is also the way to go if you are hunting in darkness where conventional photography isn't practical. Just like visible light, you cannot see through trees or bushes (actually, in the case of thermal, you cannot see through clear glass). But in those instances where heat accumulates, a hot spot will usually give up the location of what ever is generating the heat. Yeah, you can see footprints and hand prints for a few seconds under optimum conditions, but not in practical application. For several reasons, the best time to use the equipment outdoors is just a few hours before sunrise.

I have been out of the business for nine years. I imagine the equipment has improved dramatically in the past few years.

Great info, HMB. Thanks!

I inquired quite awhile ago at a place right here in Massachusetts that sells and rents thermal and if I remember right, the quoted price for a week was less than 1000 dollars, I'm thinking more along the lines of 5 or 6 hundred for a week. I mentioned to the fellow I talked to about the really high prices of these units and he told me that occasionally they offer demo units for a cheaper price (less than 10,000) and that less occasionally they will offfer older units that have been traded in for new ones for a real decent price. Check your local area for a dealer and see, perhaps they can let you know when these demo or used models are available. Be nice to get a used unit thats in good shape for a grand or two.