I need him to post a pic of it so I can picture it chasing the cows back to the barn.
I need him to post a pic of it so I can picture it chasing the cows back to the barn.
It’s Photonies, the Greek goddess of light particles that gets you. Wearing dual thermals on your head angers her so she moves the ditches around.
Dude you use her name in vain on a regular bases, first you call 2500 fom duals lame and then you refuse to see in the dark as the Lord intended. I think to get right with the Gods your gonna have to go on a walk with a single gen2 filmed unit with a blem the size of a pencil eraser in zone 1. The Gods have decreed gen2 to be the NV of the most faithful 2 Corinthians 5:7 "For we walk by faith, not sight", you gotta repent and walk in the Lords chosen sea of questionable green contrast.
www.snipershide.com
... but if there is a big field with cattle, that might work. I often see yotes around cattle and coons and deer also. So hopefully the critters will cooperate.
Agreed, building a sheet based on manufacturers specs would just be comparision shopping. Whit that in mind lets grab 10 subjective qualities.
I'll do a sit down later, but for now, I meant like different FOV's are in different divisions entirely.
I think you could remove the objectivity of image. Use something like an eye chart and run it at different distances. Thoughts?My 2 cents ...
The "specs" should be part of the purchasers "requirements" not something we "evaluate" ...
"image" however subjective, must be part of the evaluation, because other than price, "image" (or perception of image) is the primary factor folks use to make a decision. And yes, since only one data point will be taken, the results will not be conclusive (IMHO), but at least the units will be compared in the same conditions, side by side, hopefully by the same set of evaluators. So the data itself will be part of a valid test ... its just scientifically I would not place a lot of weight on the interpretation of the data, because there will only be one data set collected on one night in one location.
So "image" could be totally subjective, or it could be broken down into two parts
(a) Detection Distance (and this not what the spec sheet says, this is what the observers say it is for them at that moment, with those settings)
(b) PID distance (again what the observers say ... PID is way tougher than detection, because ideally there would be critters out there to PID, and the critters might not show up
A night capable range finder will be required equipment so the distances for Detection and PID can be measured.
So anyway, my vote, is not to evaluate based on the hard data factors like magnification, weight, length, etc. those are facts and should be part of the purchasers requirements. Even "price" is part of the requirements, not an evaluation factor. The purchaser specifies his budget and that is that. It is not right or wrong or good or bad, it is part of the requirements.
The evaluation should be on the soft factors, specifically image. But also egonomics, user interface, those sorts of things.
True, a large horse arena or warehouse might be an option to test those systems and keep it an even playing field/reduce the variables that mother nature throws at you.For me, there are 3 high level variables on image and they matter in the order listed below
1 - Conditions
Thermal conditions matter the most. One night I might have a beautiful crystal clear image with the UTC-x. The next night, in a Noah's rain, I can't see sh^t except maybe the top of the tree line. The night after that, everything is fuzzy sea of grey, etc. Thermal conditions matter the most.
2 - Operation Experience.
Most thermals have various knobs and levers and such that affect thermal image. I've got quite a few years with the BAE cores and almost as much with the Pulsar cores and Armasight cores.
And I'd split operator experience up into two sub-categories
2a - Operator experience with thermal in general
2b - Operator experience with the thermal in question
I know people don't want to hear this. They don't want themselves to be part of the problem/solution. I can only go by my experience. Several years after going out with thermals, stuff just clicked and my images got a lot better.
101 - Nuc the sh^t out of it. I do a lot of 360s as critters can come from any direction at any time. I catch some sky in part of my 360s typically. It is COLD up there and that throws off the heat map. I have to nuc. Some nights I literally nuc twice for each 360. Often at least once. In my first few years I didn't.
102 - Adjust the brightness
103 - Adjust the gain
104 - Focus
All that matters and on some thermals there are other knobs that matter. A lot of people I speak with "set their thermal up and leave it" ... well I probably did that also in the first few years, but not anymore. If I want optical thermal image I am continuously banging those buttons. I've finally learned which ones to bang to make in better right now. I learned that by banged the sh^t out of them for years.
The Operator matters a lot
3 - The Widget matters
Yes, the device actually does matter, but not as much as those first two ^^ ...
So if you want to get scientific about it, IMHO, you have two remove the first two variables to get down to the third one.
One tester per core ... and yes the PROCESS matters a lot ... and should be written down, agreed to by the testers and followed to the letter. Each specific test should probably be done in synchronized fashion. Then if there is a guy who is really good at thru lens pics (there are a tiny few such guys, I am not among them!) then that guy could walk down the line and snap the pics for each thermal after each thermal finished a given test.
I would test at multiple distances and multiple magnifications, outside.
When to nuc, how to focus, how to set brightness, how to set gain (contrast), etc. all needs to be part of the process. I've compared thermals like this before ... and it definitely takes makin the process across the thermals as much the same as possible - and understand where it can't be the same and deciding how to handle.
==
All that said, my impression is the goal of this gathering would be perhaps more social than science. In which case, I'd skip all the above and break out the food and beverages and have a great time looking through a lot of great gear for several hours !!
