Forgive me if this topic has already been posted somewhere here. I searched, but couldn't find it.

I don't know much about thermal imagers, but some of my fellow field researchers have expressed their wish to have a thermal imager. My only exposure to these devices has been on tv shows where you can see a red image that, at best, is sort of in the shape of the animal, or at worst, is just a red blob.

Since I'm quite ignorant about thermals, I thought I'd ask here what is so great about them for our purposes?

One argument I've heard against them is that for a creature as hairy as the one we're looking for, the heat signature might not be picked up through all that hair. I have no clue if this is true or not, just repeating what I heard.

Another one is that no imager is going to be able to see through the forest and pick out that heat signature anyway. The subject would have to be in an exposed situation, and how often would that happen.

So I'm wondering how important these devices would be then, especially considering their high cost.

From what I have read and images I've seen posted on the net these imagers will easily detect a heat signature through hair, such as on a bear or even clothing on a human for that matter Pat.

Pat B-

Speaking from my experience, my opinion is that they are extremely significant when strategically used and if even a 1/3 of Field researchers (who operate predominantly at night had access to them) this "thing" would be over. I don't believe their is a more effective research tool, I really don't. I've only got experience with 2 different units - a stationary 250D Ratheon and hundreds of hours with the Thermal-Eye X200xp hand-held (which is said to be the lightest compact unit in the market today). Both are essentially "black and white." Anything black seen in your screen will be very cold, void of any heat, gray and gray outline is pretty much 99% of what you view and includes most dirt, vegetation, trees etc... Anything alive (any animals or land mammals) will glow white to flourescent white. However, so will rocks in many places which can hold in an incredible amount of heat and it limits the effectiveness of these units in really rocky terrain (Sierras, CA for example) especially if the animal your viewing remains stationary. The main issue we've run into is recording difficulties as we've gone from using a helmet mounted hand-held connected to a 12-volt battery and mini-dvr contained in a backpack, with the person wearing this equipment having to look through viewer goggles. This has several drawbacks, but the main difficulty (due to combo of depth perception and blanket gray view) is wearing this equipment and attempting to negotiate any terrain other than a relatively flat road. Our newer set-up, consists of using the hand-held on a camppole with a feed running through a regular handycam recorder- in this set-up you view and record through the handheld through the recorder and not the therm itself which allows you to view 360 degrees by using only your fingers. This set-up which is better, was tricky to use at first and unfortuneatly gives off waaaaay to much light. Ideally you want to be able to use the hand-held like a camcorder-flick a switch and your in business. Had this been possible I'd have some unbelievable footage myself right now, believe me.
On the flip side (although your right that vegetation can completely block the heat signature of an animal) you can see an animal from a significant distance through pitch-blackness night or day! Also what you see is what you get, meaning if you view an animal within 100 yds you will see a definitive white profile of that animal. Furthermore, within that distance you can discern- if something bipedal is clothed or not. Even if you get a subject at a distance (imager works for about a thousand feet) and were able to record it, it's pretty easy to get footage of a comparison person in the same spot to gauge height, width etc..
The thing I love is that you can cover great distances and ground with these units (therming down small mountains, hills, stremabeds, off bridges etc..)and using them while being a passenger in a slower moving vehicle I've seen several black bears, deers, cows, you name it. It just takes awhile to get used to and tuning the unit to your eye.
As for "One argument I've heard against them is that for a creature as hairy as the one we're looking for, the heat signature might not be picked up through all that hair." Apparently this is a problem with ONLY polar bears because their white hair reabsorbs the heat radiating from the animals body. However, from my experience this is not an issue with sasquatches- at least the one I witnessed through an imager from 50 yds in WA state. I may've also seen one from about 130-150 yds off a bridge in NorCal at midnight last November, but from that distance all I could discern was what it performed (negotiated extremely steep hill without visual or noticeable break in stride) and that it was bipedal. To far to see the animals exact profile so I don't feel comfortable saying that's what it was.
Hope this helps you Pat and I really enjoy your sketches.

I don't think it's the white hair... that would reflect light not heat if I'm not mistaken. If there's a problem I would think it might have more to do with the layers of fat and natural insulation holding in the heat. I don't think fur color would matter.

As far as the amorphous blob on the color screens goes.... yeah, that's why I would never buy one that "sees" in color only.

The black & white is SO much clearer and sharper. Take a look here (and I've seen even clearer examples at greater distances but don't have time to look longer this morning!) : http://cgi.ebay.com/Raytheon-Imager-Therma...1QQcmdZViewItem

http://infrared.als.lbl.gov/pubs/PolarBearASME.pdf

The fur absorbs infrared light at the same rate as the surrounding snow, making it nearly invisible to Infrared sensors. In some cases that is.

Thanks for all the quick responses and great information.

Bart your experience in the field with thermals sounds pretty extensive. I'm not very techno savvy, so I'm trying to understand your description of the newer imager you're using up on the tent pole, and how that works. Seems kinda awkward, but I may be misinterpreting what you said. Ideally, like you said, I would think the best way would be to have a hand-held, or goggle form of the imager that could record like a camcorder... so ease of use in the field would be maximum.



Okay, but these big guys are very close in shape to human, except for a few proportioning differences, their greater size and hairiness. So when you're actually in the field, viewing one (I can hope, can't I?), how could you be sure what you're seeing isn't a human being at that moment. I understand that later you can do size comparisons, if you've filmed the themal image.

I know you said if it's within 100 yds, you have a clear image showing details, so you'd be able to tell if there was clothing on the figure or not, and I suppose you could see hanging hair patterns too? But beyond that, say at 150 yds or greater, I assume it would just be a white shape in the general configuration of a biped. How would you distinguish that from a human on the spot, not later? You might be out there, thinking you're viewing a bf but in reality it's another human being ... ?

Everything you said Pat, is for the most part very accurate. From to far of a distance you can't distinguish, and although interesting would probably be no more definitive in science's eyes than say footage of a far-off but extraordinarily large aircraft performing some amazing manuevers. This is why even if we had been able to film the subject my partner and I witnessed off a NorCal bridge (didn't have recording capability that night) it would've likely been just an interesting conversation piece and wouldn't have proved anything. Would've been interesting though because you would've seen a subject proven to be taller and bigger than a human walk right up a steep hill without the benefit of any light source, then sit there and watch us for almost two minutes as its head glowed through the trees, before fading back out of sight. In this case clothes isn't an issue because if your alive you will glow white even if you're wearing black.

What I saw in WA was a whole different ballgame and I believe would've been very difficult to deny had we gotten footage. And I initialy thought the subject I witnessed was a human (maybe female urinating by a tree) due to some vegetative blockage, the angle the subject was at initially, not expecting to see what I was seeing in that situation etc... I realized what it was when it hit the ground transitioning itself into several different positions in the process (I've discussed it thoroughly here, BFF and Let's Talk Bigfoot). The last 30 or so seconds of my encounter were of it's back facing me, "frozen" profile of the "naked" subject which clearly possessed many proportion differences from a human, including- no neck, extremely broad shoulders, very long arms with my guess about 70% of the subject's weight located in the upper extremities. Their was no doubt 20 or so seconds into my encounter what I was looking at, however, due to depth and distance perception (thought I was about 30 yds away not 50) I thought the subject wasn't much bigger than a person until my very "clothed" friend and fellow researcher who was 6'3, 170lbs, went back to the spot and my jaw almost fell on the floor, because although "it" only appeared to be a half a foot or so taller in comparison to him, it was in fact 3 times his body mass and I would guess based on that comparison, in the neighborhood of a healthy 450. Didn't see any hanging hair though!

And believe me, although I do have extensive experience with this particular unit, I'm probably the least techno-type male in the country, embarrassingly so. I only know enough to be dangerous, as they say. And just picture you have a camera-sized unit on a camppole which the length of the pole can be adjusted- holding that in one hand, you would hold a regular handycam in your other that has a wire connection to the thermal unit. Now say I'm a passenger in a slower moving or stationary car for instance, you could hold the stick and therm outside the vehicle window or truckbed and twirl it through your fingers to pan or see front, back, side to side. The image from what the unit is seeing is fed into the handycam (look at image screen on sidedoor of video camera and try to keep concealed to hide light given off).

As for the subject I witnessed, the only sketch I could find close to matching the profile was one of Travers sketches. However, I was on Amazon the other day and this kind of ridiculous caricature from a "bigfooting in OK" dvd blew me away because to me, the profile is unmistakable if you could picture the drawn "bigfoot" with its back facing you and jusssst a lil bit longer arms (never saw feet).

Click to view attachment

This is pretty damn right on (although I would GUESS based on what I saw, the facial characteristics would be more ape-like) but you can get an idea why I say the majoity of the subject's weight was upstairs. This is the profile.

Whoa, Stacy, that thing is expensive! No wonder we poor bigfooters don't have better equipment. Wouldn't it be great to see what Bart saw through his imager? Maaannn!

Bart, do you mind telling us what your thermal stuff cost? (and thanks for the compliment, BTW)

Yes it would, that's why we're trying to figure out how the heck to GET one!

Actually Pat you want to know the truth, can you keep a secret? The imager I used is hot but I heard they go for around 9K.

I'm kidding, they are 9K and it was provided by our BFRO sponsor (Wally Hersom) who really is a great guy (and I feel indebted to him for life for making my dream come true). My encounter took place near Mt Rainier, WA and was totally unexpected (we were unprepared) but it wasn't a BFRO expedition, it was a 40th anniversary get-together for the P/G. My good friend and field partner Cliff Barackman is equipped indefinitely with one stationary unit and one handheld unit and made the trek up to meet us right after doing the Coast to Coast show. He almost didn't make it up, which would've meant ,no therms, which wouldv'e = no sighting for Bart.

Btw Pat, been meaning to ask- nice Ontario gal such as yourself, please tell me your a Blue Jays fan. Sometimes it just gets lonely being the only native Californian who is.

Holy cow, Bart! You're a Blue Jays fan? RIGHT ON!

Yep, I'm a big Jays fan. For years, my husband and I had seasons tickets. We went to at least 20 games a year. Now we just watch on TV, but lately I've been losing a bit of interest ... you can only hope for so long before you get a bit tired of waiting. Every year, I still hope though. Too bad we're up against all the big money teams though. I think it puts us at a disadvantage.

What got you rooting for them .. all the way from CA?

Right on Pat, I've heard rumors of existence and saw some questionable footage on TV, (thought it was fans from other teams just wearing Blue Jays stuff) but I was beginning to wonder if I was truly the only Blue Jay fan.
Actually I've been a fan since I was six (about the same time I became interested in those hairy things) and I go see them in Oakland, on average twice a year and watch every game on satellite. Also took my ex-girlfriend to Toronto in 94' and went to the Skydome/Rogers Center for a four-gamer with the Yanks. It's funny because before their was the internet where you could browse, shop and throw a credit card down on anything you want, the only way for this little spoiled brat to get his Blue Jays gear was for Dad's various restaurant owner and chef friends from Toronto who would send it to me, LOL.
Imagine how I felt in 2000-2001 when I was starting to have my first doubts about bigfoots and they were talking about possible contraction for the Jays franchise? My two loves Well now it's 2007 and I can tell you that these animals are real and so are the Blue Jays (if they stay healthy). I know that last one's a bit of a stretch and you'll believe it when you see it though

Bartlojays,
Was the get together where you saw your beast, a publicized event? or was it a private gathering?

Hey Drew-

It was private and invitation only and consisted mostly of our WA-BFRO and WABFR folks (many are in both) and of course Bob Gimlin, who was there a majority of the time, but was gone the night of my encounter. About 40 or so in attendance with several staying at a rented cabin 10 miles away from our site and the rest staying in 3 sites with the nearest being about a mile from my CA gang.
And Drew, you kill me- "beast," I'm just giving you a hard time because with the use of that one word it reveals the skeptic in you, LOL. Know what though, that trip was like a fairytale as far as I'm concerned, so please call that sucker anything you want.

Were you the only one using the Thermal imager that night? or was it being passed around to different people for their use as well?

How would you classify the group you were with that night? Amateur researchers, Professional Bigfooters, Famous Bigfooters, or explain how you would generalize the group's make-up.

Drew- Bear with me on the classification of the group as I define them, because I'd contend that we are all amateur bigfooters. As for "famous" bigfooters, if we're talking recognizable in terms of the "bigfoot community," I would say a few mostly from my gang- "Bobo" (my main mentor) and Tom Yamarone, (best friend) who writes bigfoot songs. You have to remember, although someone maybe recognizable as a 'bigfooter" is doesn't mean they are a very active, fearless field strategy type guy/gal that one would get an instant mental picture of. Take Tom for instance, he likes to be there, maintain our camp, callblasts if approriate etc.. he doesn't care or try to be anything else because he contributes to this community in so many other ways. Several of us, Bo, Paul G, Jamie, Cliff even myself will do the more extensive night hiking, spycamping, thermal & personal deployments etc... Everyone has a role and sometimes those roles change. That night know one had a roll because it everyone treated it as a social-type gathering.
But to answer your question I would say that Paul G (quiet under the radar type), Bo and even Cliff are the most experienced in this field and I'd label "advanced bigfooters" and put them up against anybody. Their was also a few "bigfoot on the brain types" (only maybe 2) and the rest was made up of us that get out pretty frequently and have at minimum,100 nights in the field. My good friend, Jamie Jackson (fmr US Special Forces & sniper who shot his way out of Mogadishu-Black Hawk Down incident) doesn't get out as often as most of us, but is sharp, knowledgeable and disciplined as anybody I know when he is out. Overall it was a good experienced bunch, but we are all amateurs and don't let anybody ever tell you differently in this field in any situation.

As for me, yes I was the only one who used the therm that night, until Cliff put all the gear on and went back to where I witnessed the subject. I only used the handheld therm because while urinating just prior, I heard two consecutive small branch/steps which didn't sound any bigger than a deer back about 50 yds behind everybody in pitch-blackness (yes, where I witnessed it was very close to where I'd walked a few minutes prior!). Cliff hadn't deployed the equip that evening and in defense of him I know he was burnt after spending several weeks out in the field, he's pretty protective of that equip because he's responsible for it, it's extremely expensive and it isn't his, and to be honest, nothing in the previous two nights happened (imo) that would indicate we were in the right place at the right time. All I heard were some awsome barred owl calls and mating. Also heard an extensive and impressive range of calls from these owls that I could understand people would jump to a bigfoot-like conclusion.
This area is a favorite of our WA people who a few I believe have had a few sightings there previously, undetermined and purported BF calls, wood-knocking, being followed etc... they just don't have the equipment. (and yes, I'm not afraid to say I am on the shelf about many of those purported bigfoot behaviors, btw, even now).

bart

do ya do anything around central california?

i ask cause im in pismo beach.

Hey Shaman-

Wow, your only a few hours south of me. I've been through the Las Padres, Ventana Wilderness, Big Sur and Santa Cruz Mtn areas several times and have been shut out everytime. I've even been shutout through the Sierras. I do most of my "research" in NorCal with my gang, but I often do get out here in Central CA and I still pull periodic reports out of these central locations. I don't know maybe their's just no resident populations in these areas (which food sources is less of an issue in some of these areas it's so abundant) or like I speculate their's not alot of squatches for the amount of land encompassed. Which, I guess you can say that's all over NA, LOL. If you ever want to get out, contact me as I do have my own callblasting equipment, sound recording devices and can maybe overnight to 2 days, accessible thermal units if a location is worthwhile. feel free to PM me anytime.

i could do northern runs for maybe two days tenting it.

its too far to bring the motorhome.

im locked in pretty good here at diablo canyon working a six day a week schedule till around the end of march(maybe) some times we may go four ten hour days with three day weekends but i dont know the exact schedule yet.

tell ya straight, im no longer a walker and i dont have a four wheel drive, just a little front wheel drive wanna be suv type critter.

i can cook up a mean breakfast.

Was the “camppole” setup the one you operated for your WA encounter Bart? It does give off a lot of light, and imagine this creature saw you very easily. When we were out with you last month, I dropped back a few times and could see how bright it was. I still feel the contortions from the creature were to get a reaction from you, so it would know if you could see it or not. Or, the young women was embarrassed you caught her urinating in the dark and was trying to hide (!) [insert ‘tough-love’ smilie here]. JK!

The thermal-eye-200 unit Bobo had me using , was not as flexible as yours, but could be put against the eye and hide most of the emitting light. With both units, it took 10-20 seconds for the eyes to readjust after looking away from the viewers… does take some experience to use them correctly and traverse non-flat ground. Great images though, very impressive for the first time.

The new Thermal-Eye X-50 is half the price… could sell one of my cars I guess…
X50

T

T-

The set-up I showed you on the trail that night in the Sierras was the newer "camppole set-up," which takes a while to get used too but gives you the ability to record. I like using this unit while being a passenger in a slow-moving vehicle or even filming out side a stationary vehicle in a promising location as I did in Wally's motorhome all night the week before the Sierras, near Shasta.
In WA all I had in my hand was just the xp-200 thermal-eye by itself. At that time, the only recording set-up we used was that unit on a helmet, goggles (I hated) and a heavy backpack you'd wear in front of you with the 12-volt and DV-R.
If their was a way that that handheld could record with a flick of a switch and no added light, I'd have what I believe would've been 2+ minutes of undeniable thermal footage, That's not including however long more the subject would've decided to stay in a stationary position, stay in view or if it had decided to depart while in view-and however far and long I was willing to pursue it. T- you saw how little light that handheld gives off by itself. This is also why I disagree with Matt and many others who think these things can see so well nocturnally. Many proponents think they would have too, but being built for maneuverability, and possessing acute sense of hearing and smell with sufficient eyesight is fine imo to easily negotiate the forest at night. It's my interpretation from my own experience that "it" never appeared to "lock on" to me in those two minutes and it uncharacteristically (you'd think) stuck around?
Oh well it's all assumptions and interpretations until we have a body and know for sure, all we can do is learn from what we think we do now from our experiences and apply that knowledge which hopefully gives you a little better edge.

Thats a good tag-line btw ! You were very fortunate and lucky that night for sure. I assume you had no inclination to charge at the beast, as you were more composed in attempting some help to record it for the rest of us. I must tell you though, after about 10 secconds of verifying in my mind it might not be human, personally (and some might say selfishly) I'm sure I would have charged while it was laying there. What I would have done if caught up to it who knows...(or I wont say!)

What do you think of that $5K model ?

T

That one looks interesting, and more affordable, but I wonder how good it is? What do they mean when they call it a camera? I couldn't find any reference to it being able to actually take photos, so I'm assuming they just mean that in the sense that it has a lens and viewfinder? They do mention there are inputs for video, so I guess that answers my question ..

What does X50, X100, and X200 mean?

And Bart, can you post links to the imagers you've been using in the field (and/or pics of them)? I'd like to get an idea of what they look like and how they function. Thanks.

Here you go Pat, this is the exact unit we use and that I saw it with.

https://gpssignal.com/thermaleyex200.htm

Pat, I looked at that page, and as far as I can tell the numbers are just model numbers. Looks like the higher numbers just represent the higher end product line(or in some cases, newer!).

Hey thanks, Bart. That thing is pretty neat. I'd like one please (yeah, right .. I'll have to save my loonies!)

It looks a bit like my nightvision scope. do you know the amplification on it? And I suppose the field of vision isn't very large, judging by the size of the lens. So if you wanted to plug in a camcorder to it, you could do that? Which one would you look through then, the thermal imager? And like you said earlier, you'd keep the camcorder in a backpack, while you're recording?

Nightwing, yeah, I see that now. The better the technology, the higher the number. We need some of those this season!

Not sure on the amplification but your right as the field of vision isn't very large. On the 250D Raytheon (primarily stationary therm) my partner Cliff is currently equipped with (besides this x200), I think he just got a wider lens which is really important when that bigger unit is strategically positioned and stationed, running all night. You definitely want the widest field of vision possible.
As for the x200, I actually just used it again the other night in the Santa Cruz Mtns when the boys and I did a quick one-nighter. When that x200 is used in conjunction with a sony digital recorder, you actually look through the eyepiece on the recorder and not the therm (or if you have the flap open it's a bigger screen but gives off way to much light). It's kind of weird and I was a little rusty the other night because it takes you a while to realize you don't have to point the camera or turn your head, LOL. You only turn and move around the therm with the camp pole.
In my opinion, until we get a workable attachment with recording capability for that hand-held or pocket attachment that's decent quality, we're not going to walk up on a squatch and get good footage if you know what I mean. Until that happens, our best chances are catching one while I therm outside from the passenger seat of a moving vehicle, therm from a vantage point from a distance or catch one coming through during the night where we plant the stationary, or maybe, just maybe from a spy position away from the others at camp.
I really believe now that had I had the current recording set-up with me in WA during my sighting, I would've got maybe 8-10 seconds of it getting the hell out of there (certainly better then nothing). Had it happened with me literally flicking a switch and not giving off light I'd have had the two minutes I saw it and likely more for however much longer it was planning to stand there like a statue before departing. God, that would've been something, seeing that thing walk off after what I think was obviously a deceptive strategy on it's part to remain perfectly still to not draw (or make me lose) attention.

A year and a half since the last post, and not that much has changed, about using thermal in the field. Now there are mini-digital dvrs for recording, to attach to them, but no stand alones that have a total package of long term internal video recording, that I know of at least. Some of the newer ones have telelphoto to an extent, but not real zoom x20 plus, which would be nice. The prices haven't come down, hehe. Ebay still sells used ones that work fine. These units aren't made for squatching, so you have to patch what you need together. As long as they sell batteries, I'll use my dinosaur firehouse model, and hi8 recorder. Some of the old stuff can be better that the newer models. My Sony Nightshot hi8, still kicks butt on even the newest night vision units.

I'm still of a mind that thermal is pretty much for finding BF, with followup by other means of hunting and recording. Elimination of other subjects, etc. Makes moving through a section many times faster when you know what made that twig snap. Deer,,,,,,,,,,Deer,,,,,,,coon,,,,,,,,,,,,,bear,,,,,,,,,,BEAR,,,,,,,,,deer. Eyeshine with other nightvision? Call over the thermal guy. Rock thrown? Call over the thermal guy. An advantage also, if you see one, and it runs off, you can track the foot prints for at least 5 minutes after it ran through. During the fall, winter, spring, is best for it, when the environment is alot cooler than the BF, and it would stand out like a sore thumb. Even at night, in the summer, the surrounding environment would make it difficult to see it against 80 plus temps.

Keep an eye on Ebay. I got mine for 1500.

GH-
Take a look at the new FLIR H-series...
Internal recording to SD card PLUS a video output, 320x240 native resolution, and a pricetag between $3k and $4k.
It's been announced, but has not shipped yet.