Optical detection?

[bureaupro2000@yahoo.com]

It is interesting to hear more opinions from people documented scientifically, not fraud as Maxfynd http://www.maxfynd.com/ sellers! It sells some cameras, that if you want to find your treasure, movies and sends it in Australia filming, then pay and send you some **** colored interpretations of programs ... same Rangeltell ...

[ivconic]

It is interesting to hear more opinions from people documented scientifically, not fraud as Maxfynd http://www.maxfynd.com/ sellers! It sells some cameras, that if you want to find your treasure, movies and sends it in Australia filming, then pay and send you some **** colored interpretations of programs ... same Rangeltell ...

To find exact treasure with camera.... tough!
But to use Flir camera to explore soil a bit more and collect more informations about some soil's features ... it is possible.
Don't pay attention at all on advertisements which containing word "treasure" !
Because such advs are there to "chill your pockets" and nothing else!

[humhum]

My try photos

Hi to All, ı make several photos try without IR filter .


Before and After

[ivconic]

There is lot to achieve and discover with plain optics and various filters, i agree.
Rife is most known exactly by that.
Light and its "dimensions" are still not fully examined and explained enough.
Our sight is not capable enough to accept all the light features and possibilities that may existing with.
Using filters is barely enough to see just top of the "iceberg"!

[Max]

Hello, friends!
Could promising optical detection, a future in search of treasures from a distance?
If metals, emit ions that then I could detect infra red spectrum, using a camera with a filter 720nm - 1000nm? David Villanueva explain this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4JOjqYQZVY
Someone experienced?

I belive can work, but not so good and with large things underground , not small stuff

the temperature gradient is widely used for other stuff... if you remember some pictures of post-WTC attack in 2001 you know what I mean

(is possible even detecting from satellite or airborne vehicles the gradient variations and so large temperature anomalies underground... but NOT small things or masses)

[Max]

Ahh that!
No i haven't, but i already heard the same opinions like your, from other people too!

Hi Ivconic
I belive can work, but as I explained above and as you stated: difference of temp from surface soil to underground few meters and large structures and anomalies , not for the small things

regards,
Max

[Dave J.]

Sounds like several completely different things are being discussed in this thread.

Flir is a real (big time) infrared thermography company. Infrared thermography is generally in the 6 to 14 micron band and has nothing to do with imaginary "metal ions" or near-infrared 1 micron stuff which uses silicon sensors.

Infrared thermography can't literally look underground; however differences in the thermal properties and temperature distributions of soil can result in detectable temperature differences at the ground surface esp. under calm cloudy nighttime conditions.

Snow is a thermal sensor. It is often noticed that over buried structures, snow melts either sooner or later than over adjacent areas. Infrared thermography is a way of taking a snapshot of somewhat the same thing that snow cover indicates. And of course works in places where it never snows.

Infrared thermography is a noncontact method and the distances over which it can be done are basically limited only by the resolving power of the sensing and optical system. It's a basic weather satellite measurement.

So, where does the subject belong? It's clearly scientific and although the natural science involved is that of atmospheric physics, the interpretation of the data includes geophysics. I say it belongs in the geophysics forum.

And, the reason that it doesn't belong in the "remote sensing" forum is because that's the de facto LRL forum, which has nothing to do with scientific remote sensing technologies.

--Dave J.

[Qiaozhi]

Sounds like several completely different things are being discussed in this thread.

Flir is a real (big time) infrared thermography company. Infrared thermography is generally in the 6 to 14 micron band and has nothing to do with imaginary "metal ions" or near-infrared 1 micron stuff which uses silicon sensors.

Infrared thermography can't literally look underground; however differences in the thermal properties and temperature distributions of soil can result in detectable temperature differences at the ground surface esp. under calm cloudy nighttime conditions.

Snow is a thermal sensor. It is often noticed that over buried structures, snow melts either sooner or later than over adjacent areas. Infrared thermography is a way of taking a snapshot of somewhat the same thing that snow cover indicates. And of course works in places where it never snows.

Infrared thermography is a noncontact method and the distances over which it can be done are basically limited only by the resolving power of the sensing and optical system. It's a basic weather satellite measurement.

So, where does the subject belong? It's clearly scientific and although the natural science involved is that of atmospheric physics, the interpretation of the data includes geophysics. I say it belongs in the geophysics forum.

And, the reason that it doesn't belong in the "remote sensing" forum is because that's the de facto LRL forum, which has nothing to do with scientific remote sensing technologies.

--Dave J.

I agree.
However, this thread was originally started with reference to David Villanueva's book, and the use of an infra-red filter to detect gold. That's why it was moved here to Remote Sensing. Later on, Ivconic added some comments about Flir. I suggest that, if you want to discuss Flir, then open a new thread in the Geophysics forum.

[J_Player]

I agree.
However, this thread was originally started with reference to David Villanueva's book, and the use of an infra-red filter to detect gold. That's why it was moved here to Remote Sensing. Later on, Ivconic added some comments about Flir. I suggest that, if you want to discuss Flir, then open a new thread in the Geophysics forum.

I agree also.
The Villanueva book was shown by Esteban here: www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?p=107769#post107769
By the time we got to the end of that thread, it appeared to be clear to me that photos he took to show the farthest infrared his cameras could capture were not showing anything to do with treasure. Instead we were seeing artifacts from reflected near IR same as if it were visible red light. And some of the photos also showed artifacts which appear to be produced by uneven operation of the rollers in a polaroid camera, or perhaps imperfections of the film. In the case of red spots near the center of the digital images, it looked suspiciously similar to the near IR beam that many digital cameras project in order to help focus the lens. I would expect to see the camera project this focus-assist beam considering he had filtered out most of the visible light from reaching the lens.

But the fact is, the near IR that the best digital cameras and film cameras can capture is not in a range that can indicate temperature. Even the night-vision IR is really capturing dim near IR light that is reflected off objects and then amplified so that it can be seen.

In order to actually see images of temperatures, you need a thermal imaging camera which does not see any visible light or near IR. It sees only heat emissions to form an image. We had a forum thread where using real thermal imaging cameras was considered, and concluded that it could be helpful finding treasures in the right conditions. Unfortunately this thread was about a $59 digital infrared thermometer that someone claimed was a valuable cave detector worth thousands of dollars. In the process of debunking the claimed "treasure finding" firmware, it became apparent that you would need a thermal imaging method rather than a simple thermometer to help find treasures. Original thread here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12806

There is a lot of literature which shows the difference between near IR imaging and thermal imaging done well into the IR band. In the examples below you can see how near IR does not show temperatures, but only reflected near IR light. Then you look at the thermal image made to measure the temperature of the objects and you see a much different image. The colors are then added to the black and white thermal image using software to make it easier to recognize the temperatures. I think Dave is correct. Thermal imaging can be very useful to help locate treasures in certain circumstances.

The diagrams below were taken from the original article here: http://www1.infraredtraining.com/view/?id=40483

Best wishes, J_P

[GOLDENSKULL]

Hi...

you think we can detect treasure underground by infrared filter on our digital camera ???

if everyone have this book please upload in here :

The Successful Treasure Hunter's Secret Manual
Author: David Villanueva

Thanks...

[J_Player]

Hi...

you think we can detect treasure underground by infrared filter on our digital camera ???

if everyone have this book please upload in here :

The Successful Treasure Hunter's Secret Manual
Author: David Villanueva

Thanks...

Hi Goldenskull,
I just finished explaining above that I don't think you can do it, and I explained the reasons why it does not work.
You can find treasures with any camera only if they are placed in a location where the camera can photograph them.
This means they must not be buried, but put in a place where you can see the light shine on them.

If you want to detect the head from buried things with a camera, then you need a thermal sensing camera like FLIR camera.
A thermal sensing camera will give you an image of the heat variations on the ground.
Ordinary digital cameras cannot do this regardless of what filters are removed from the camera or added onto the lens.
You can read above to learn the answers.


Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Hi Goldenskull,
I just finished explaining above that I don't think you can do it, and I explained the reasons why it does not work.
You can find treasures with any camera only if they are placed in a location where the camera can photograph them.
This means they must not be buried, but put in a place where you can see the light shine on them.

If you want to detect the head from buried things with a camera, then you need a thermal sensing camera like FLIR camera.
A thermal sensing camera will give you an image of the heat variations on the ground.
Ordinary digital cameras cannot do this regardless of what filters are removed from the camera or added onto the lens.
You can read above to learn the answers.


Best wishes,
J_P

Even with a Flir camera you can't "see" in the ground at depth more than 20 ... 30 cm.
I had a Flir before some years....

Regards

[J_Player]

Even with a Flir camera you can't "see" in the ground at depth more than 20 ... 30 cm.
I had a Flir before some years....

Regards

Hi Geo,
A thermal imaging camera cannot see into the ground at all.
What it can do is make an image which shows where the temperatures are varying on the ground surface.
Some thermal imaging cameras can do this much better than others.
Most of these cameras are designed for special purposes and they are optimized for different temperature ranges.

How deep an object must be before you can see a temperature difference depends on many things.
we generally look for an area of ground that is cooling or heating as the ambient temperature above the ground is changing.
Under these conditions when the ground is gaining or losing heat, we see the best patterns of heat variation from buried objects.

But other things that can influence how deep you can detect the object include the emissivity if the object, and the difference in emissivity between it and the surrounding soil.
Also the degree of temperature change above the surface that causes the ground to gain or loose heat, and the size of the buried object can influence how deep a buried object's heat pattern can be seen at the surface.
Even ground that has no buried object can show a small temperature variation in locations where holes were dug because the soil is disturbed and not compacted the same as the surrounding soil.
So it can have different emissivity properties than undisturbed soil around it.

This is the reason why I think thermal imaging can help to find treasures in some conditions, but not all.
If you are looking in a war relic field which many people recover ancient artifacts from, then I think the thermal image will show you many holes that are empty, and maybe only a few locations with undisturbed artifacts if they are not too small or too deep to leave a heat image. But if you are in a desert where nobody goes and looking for an ancient treasure trove maybe 5 tons of gold statues in a cavern, maybe 2 meters deep, then I think it will be very helpful to look for signs of heat variation on the surface to locate the cavern.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Hi...

you think we can detect treasure underground by infrared filter on our digital camera ???

if everyone have this book please upload in here :

The Successful Treasure Hunter's Secret Manual
Author: David Villanueva

Thanks...

The book is copyrighted. You cannot load a copy here.
Have a look on eBay. There are often cheap secondhand copies being sold there.