I have a raspberry pi along with the noir camera, I could try and work out a visit if it will help any... I also of course have sufficient equipment to be able to hook it up mobile or even using solar. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Lampe, Mattias SLC CT PEK < mattias.lampe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > after some experimenting I have to correct my previous statement that a > modified webcam (after removal/exchange of the IR filter) is unsuitable for > thermal imaging. > > > > Here are my learnings: > > - Objects hotter than approx. 260 degrees centigrade (about 500 > degrees Fahrenheit) seem to “light up” in the near infrared image. The > hotter the brighter, so at least a relative temperature comparison is > possible, to some extent. The tip of a hot soldering iron, for example, > appears to shine quite brightly when looking at it through a modified > webcam. > > - Hot combustion gases show up brightly in the IR image, even if > they are invisible to the naked eye. (Not sure if it’s the CO2 or some > other gas that causes the effect. > > > > As a proof, here are some videos taken simultaneously with three cheap > webcams of the same brad and model. One had the IR blocking filter removed, > anouther one had the blocking filter replaced by a filter blocking visible > light (i.e. only letting IR pass to the sensor), and the third camera was > not modified at all. > > > > The so-so quality of the videos is not due to the camera but due to the > slow computer used for recording and encoding. If the videos don’t play in > your browser, downloading them may help. > > > > This is me frying an egg as seen by a normal webcam (visible light only): > > > https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=6838BE39B86A56AC!178&authkey=!AKrXza_7QKYre8s&ithint=video%2c.mp4 > > Please note the familiar short, blue gas flame. > > > > > > Looking only at the IR componente with a modified webcam, the flame looks > totally different: > > > https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=6838BE39B86A56AC!176&authkey=!AOAS5uk5p0QffiA&ithint=video%2c.mp4 > > > > The hot gas moving upward is visible, and after shutting down the flame > you can see the metal frame “glowing” for quite a while. The frying pan > itself does not light up because it never really exceeds 200 degrees C. > > > > Here is a post-processed version of the video with a so-called > gradient-mapping applied to the IR video: > > > https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=6838BE39B86A56AC!177&authkey=!AKwVxXkHqhw0Z_k&ithint=video%2c.mp4 > > > > The camera that only had the IR blocking filter removed but no blocking > filter for visible light installed took the following video: > > > https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=6838BE39B86A56AC!179&authkey=!AOZAg8XGkhGL0aQ&ithint=video%2c.mp4 > > > > (The videos were recorded simultaneously, and the lights in my kitchen are > fluorescent ones, containg very little IR. Things look quite a bit > different under incandescent lights.) > > > > > > So after initial doubts I do see some value in using modified webcams for > IR imaging of rocket motor tests. Compared to low-end FLIR cameras the > resolution is higher and the cost is nearly negligible (less than 15$ for > the cameras I used). You can observe the flow of exhaust gases and see > where things get really hot (>260 degrees), and I could imagine that IR > penetrates the smoke a little bit better than visible light. > > Absolute temperature measurements, however, would probably be impossible > or at least require quite a bit of calibration work. > > > > > > Only a single egg was hurt in the process of recording the four videos ;-) > (The other 11 eggs from the same box will be hurt later.) > > Hope it’s interesting. I’ll send the cameras to Vicente, who started > this thread. > > > > Have a good day! > > > > Mattias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* sugarshot-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > sugarshot-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Lampe, Mattias SLC CT PEK > *Sent:* Sunday, May 04, 2014 10:12 AM > *To:* sugarshot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > *Subject:* [SS2S-Main] Re: Infrared webcam > > > > Hi, > > > > I think removing the internal IR filter works with most webcams, and if > you want to make sure you ONLY see the infrared but not the visible part of > the spectrum, you can add a filter that only lets infrared light pass. A > piece of overexposed and developed color negative film (like from the > beginning of a film roll) works quite well for that purpose. It blocks > nearly all visible light and is quite transparent for IR. If you know > someone who still shoots pictures on film or someone who did so in the past > and kept the negatives, they should be able to find a suitable piece of > material. > > > > Not sure how you want to use the IR camera, but you should be aware that > it will not be a thermal imaging device. It will be sensitive only to near > infrared, and in order to emit those wavelengths a body must be quite hot > already, i.e. close to glowing. > > > > I have a few unused webcams at home and will check if they can be > converted. > > > > Have a great day! > > > > Mattias > > > > *From:* sugarshot-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [ > mailto:sugarshot-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <sugarshot-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On > Behalf Of *James Fackert > *Sent:* Saturday, May 03, 2014 1:18 AM > *To:* sUGAR sHOT TO SPACE LIST > *Subject:* [SS2S-Main] Re: Infrared webcam > > > > here is one, $30. > http://www.adafruit.com/products/1567 > > > > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Lyn Berry <lyn_berry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi > I am no expert but if memory serves webcams contain an IR filter. If the > filter is simply removed the webcam becomes much more sensative to the IR > part of the spectrum. > QED > Regards, > Lyn Berry > > > > On Friday, 2 May 2014, 12:52, Vicente Alvero Zambrano < > vicente_alvero_14@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Does anyone know and is willing to turn a webcam into a webcam with > infrared vision for the series of motors VIC and to study the ablative > materials? > > > > Cheers > > Vicente Alvero > > > > > -- I respectfully decline the invitation to join your hallucination.