Video via http://Muvy.org

On Nov 8, 3:34 pm, Joe wrote:
Video viahttp://Muvy.org

which points to ...

FLIR thermal infrared imaging home inspection, energy camera
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jXPXE0qsmjg


fyi: In the above video the IR inspection company
is using the following tool

RAZIR (Sierra Pacific Innovations) FLIR camera
http://www.thermcam.com/

I saw this particular FLIR camera priced
at 12,499.00 USD by this one particular
instrumentation company and they were
also charging 145.00 usd for a spare battery!

Fluke Ti20 at 6495 USD was less expensive but
its does not do all the fancy things that the RAZIR
does ( the RAZIR connect to your laptop with a USB
port)

drydem wrote:
On Nov 8, 3:34 pm, Joe wrote:
Video viahttp://Muvy.org

which points to ...

FLIR thermal infrared imaging home inspection, energy camera
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jXPXE0qsmjg


fyi: In the above video the IR inspection company
is using the following tool

RAZIR (Sierra Pacific Innovations) FLIR camera
http://www.thermcam.com/

I saw this particular FLIR camera priced
at 12,499.00 USD by this one particular
instrumentation company and they were
also charging 145.00 usd for a spare battery!

Fluke Ti20 at 6495 USD was less expensive but
its does not do all the fancy things that the RAZIR
does ( the RAZIR connect to your laptop with a USB
port)

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY
sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd
be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited repair funds at
the worst leaks.

aem sends...

In aemeijers writes:

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY
sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd
be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited repair funds at
the worst leaks.

For the hell of it, call your local fire department
folk. They just might have one.


--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key

[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

Anthony Matonak wrote:
danny burstein wrote:
In aemeijers
writes:
Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one
(ANY sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for
me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited
repair funds at the worst leaks.

For the hell of it, call your local fire department
folk. They just might have one.

You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

Anthony
Okay- a quick Google shows entry-level models of those start at around a
hundred bucks. Cute, but kind of steep for a one-time-use tool.

As to enlisting the FD- yeah, the multiple departments around here do
have thermal cameras, but they are the kind for spotting warm bodies
through smoke.(Donated by the local insurance companies.) Not much use
for spotting 70-degree hot spots against a 30? 40? degree background.
Not to mention, they are all understaffed and underfunded, since all the
local governmental units refuse to do the logical thing and combine them
into a metro department and cut out the duplication. They don't have the
spare manhours for non-fire related residential field trips.

I wonder if tool rental places have ever considered adding thermal
cameras to their library? Kinda hi-tech for most DIYs to use, I guess,
not to mention fragile and expensive...

aem sends...

"aemeijers" wrote in message
...

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY sort of IR
camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to
be able to target my limited repair funds at the worst leaks.

Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Don

In article ,
Anthony Matonak wrote:

You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

I've done that from the inside, spotting cold spots that needed more
insulation. It works and is cheap

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Les Cargill wrote:
aemeijers wrote:
Anthony Matonak wrote:
danny burstein wrote:
In
aemeijers writes:
Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one
(ANY sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for
me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited
repair funds at the worst leaks.

For the hell of it, call your local fire department
folk. They just might have one.

You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

Anthony
Okay- a quick Google shows entry-level models of those start at around
a hundred bucks. Cute, but kind of steep for a one-time-use tool.


Uh... no.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=93983

Thanks- that is cheap enough to be plausible. I'll add it to my 'toys to
buy' list. (At that price point, I'm sure it isn't lab or milspec
quality, but as long as it shows hot or cold spots, that is all that
really matters.)

aem sends....

Don K wrote:
"aemeijers" wrote in message
...

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY sort of IR
camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to
be able to target my limited repair funds at the worst leaks.

Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Don


Interesting- a 'Red Green' solar eclipse/welding viewer. Too bad my toy
digital doesn't have a protruding lens. I'll have to stare at my digital
camera and my box of old odd fittings from my collection of 'real' (aka
film) cameras and see if anything jumps out at me.

Maybe make one big enough to hold entire camera, with a tripod screw on
the bottom, and a drape to go over by head, like on an old plate camera?....

aem sends...

daestrom wrote:

"aemeijers" wrote in message
...
drydem wrote:
On Nov 8, 3:34 pm, Joe wrote:
Video viahttp://Muvy.org

which points to ...

FLIR thermal infrared imaging home inspection, energy camera
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jXPXE0qsmjg


fyi: In the above video the IR inspection company
is using the following tool

RAZIR (Sierra Pacific Innovations) FLIR camera
http://www.thermcam.com/

I saw this particular FLIR camera priced
at 12,499.00 USD by this one particular
instrumentation company and they were
also charging 145.00 usd for a spare battery!

Fluke Ti20 at 6495 USD was less expensive but
its does not do all the fancy things that the RAZIR
does ( the RAZIR connect to your laptop with a USB
port)

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one
(ANY sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for
me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited
repair funds at the worst leaks.


Another cheap alternative, *IF* you have a 35mm film camera (not
digital) is to buy some infrared film and take pictures. Have to wait
until they're back from developing, but not too bad. Google '35mm
infrared film'.

daestrom

aem sends...

Now that one I was aware of, and I do have a plethora of good 35mm
cameras. I'd have to special-order the film, however, and I'd be
surprised if I could only order a single roll, or even a few. Most
stores around here no longer carry 35mm, other than preloaded in
disposable cameras.

Hey, that is a market niche for somebody to exploit- have some company
that makes store-brand disposables do a production run of ones loaded
with IR film, package them with instructions and a prepaid processing
envelope, and sell them in the insulation and weatherstripping aisles at
the big-box stores. (If anybody out there makes a go of that, I want a
cut of the profits...)

I can see it now- thousands of DIYs out there at midnight in winter
coats, taking pictures of there houses, while the neighbors call in
prowler reports... :^/


aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:
drydem wrote:

On Nov 8, 3:34 pm, Joe wrote:

Video viahttp://Muvy.org


which points to ...

FLIR thermal infrared imaging home inspection, energy camera
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jXPXE0qsmjg


fyi: In the above video the IR inspection company
is using the following tool

RAZIR (Sierra Pacific Innovations) FLIR camera
http://www.thermcam.com/

I saw this particular FLIR camera priced
at 12,499.00 USD by this one particular
instrumentation company and they were
also charging 145.00 usd for a spare battery!

Fluke Ti20 at 6495 USD was less expensive but
its does not do all the fancy things that the RAZIR
does ( the RAZIR connect to your laptop with a USB
port)

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY
sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd
be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited repair funds at
the worst leaks.

Or just get an IR thermometer for about $50. I recommend the mini temps,
most have a laser pointer so you can see where you are reading the
temperature. You'll just scan the house and you'll see the actual
temperature on the readout. You won't get the big picture, but you'll
get the job done for a lot less. Mine (Raytek MT4) has an 8 to 1 beam
spread (1' circle at 8' distance, or 1" at 8") but you can get them
tighter. Don't go broader.

You can look for gaps in insulation or even air leaks around doors.
Highly usefull.

Jeff


aem sends...

On Nov 11, 9:31 am, Jeff wrote:

Or just get an IR thermometer for about $50. I recommend the mini temps,
most have a laser pointer so you can see where you are reading the
temperature. You'll just scan the house and you'll see the actual
temperature on the readout. You won't get the big picture, but you'll
get the job done for a lot less. Mine (Raytek MT4) has an 8 to 1 beam
spread (1' circle at 8' distance, or 1" at 8") but you can get them
tighter. Don't go broader.

You can also use the IR thermometer in the kitchen to check the
temperature of soups, hot chocalate, frying pans, etc.

--
Ron

Another cheap alternative, *IF* you have a 35mm film camera (not
digital) is to buy some infrared film and take pictures. Have to wait
until they're back from developing, but not too bad. Google '35mm
infrared film'.
....
Hey, that is a market niche for somebody to exploit- have some company
that makes store-brand disposables do a production run of ones loaded
with IR film, package them with instructions and a prepaid processing
envelope, and sell them in the insulation and weatherstripping aisles at
the big-box stores. (If anybody out there makes a go of that, I want a
cut of the profits...)

I can see it now- thousands of DIYs out there at midnight in winter
coats, taking pictures of there houses, while the neighbors call in
prowler reports... :^/

Afraid it ain't that simple. "Infrared" sensitive film
is NOT picking up the "heat" (term used a bit loosely)
emissions/reflections that you're looking for.

These products record the "near infra-red" part
of the spectrum. To get the termperature numbers,
you'd have to get to "far infra-red".

"Near infra-red" is the part of the spectrum that's
just beyond the regular "red" in the rainbow.

You might have heard the screams about five years
ago when Sony's camcorders, when in "nightshot"
mode, could "see through clothing". THe reality
is that the sensors could pck up "near infra-red".

Many materials that look "black" are really very, very,
dark red - letting a teensy bit of visible red
through (so small it looks blackish) but a modest
amount of near infra-red. So these cameras could
kind of, in some instances, maybe... look "through"
those fabrics - if they were thin enough.



--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key

[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:01:47 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Anthony Matonak wrote:

You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

I've done that from the inside, spotting cold spots that needed more
insulation. It works and is cheap

I've found that method to work much better with non-contact thermometers, the reason
being that the instrument works better at room temperature than it does in the cold
outdoors.

All that's required is to generate some small amount of negative pressure in the
house - several bathroom vent fans running will do it - and then scan around the
windows and doors. If you're using one of the cheap units with fixed emission
constant, pretty much ignore the actual reading and look for downward change. The
fixed emission constant, usually 0.95, is good only for near-black-body radiators.
Painted surfaces generally aren't.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
If we aren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made with meat?

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:04:47 GMT, aemeijers wrote:

Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Don


Interesting- a 'Red Green' solar eclipse/welding viewer. Too bad my toy
digital doesn't have a protruding lens. I'll have to stare at my digital
camera and my box of old odd fittings from my collection of 'real' (aka
film) cameras and see if anything jumps out at me.

The IR response of a digital camera is useless for thermal imaging. This response
maybe extends as far downward as 1.2 microns. Thermal imaging cameras respond to
very long wave IR in the 8 to 14 micron range. The usual imager is an array of
microbolometers that measures actual heating at each pixel and not a CCD or CMOS
device. The better ones use cooled arrays to reduce ambient thermal noise.

The reason thermal imagers are so expensive is that glass cannot be used for lens
material, as it doesn't pass longwave radiation. The traditional lens material is
pure germanium. Just the lens for the thermal imager I used to own cost almost $20k.
I understand that calcium fluoride has become a popular lens material and is
responsible for driving the cost down.

One other comment while I'm here. Handheld or fixed mount IR imaging cameras are NOT
FLIR, though there is a company that as adopted the military acronym as its name.
Forward Looking InfraRed refers to the technology used on planes and helicopters. The
imaging system used in these applications is as much different from the handheld
units as a handycam is to an HiDef studio camera.

I once bought two FLIRs for one of the "B" bombers (B1 or B2, I can't recall now) at
a DMRO surplus sale. Probably one of those sales of strategically sensitive
technology that Congress got its panties in a wad about.

This thing was over 4 ft long and probably 2 ft in diameter and required a forklift
to move. All the optics were germanium including the massive objective lens that was
probably a foot in diameter. It had cooled gold-plated copper AZ-EL mirrors on
frighteningly fast servo mechanisms. The imager itself was cooled somehow -
thermoelectric or sterling, probably. My casual testing showed that it could resolve
a half a degree F between two bodies.

The output was incredible. No smearing or blooming like civilian imagers. Razor
sharp crispness. Full 30 hz frame rate. It had several video output formats
including composite which I used to drive a B&W monitor.

I played with one of them for awhile and then sold them for mucho $$$ to a PCB
manufacturing company that used them for high speed inspection of boards during
burn-in.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
Risk: $20 hooker, year old condom.

"Jeff" wrote
Or just get an IR thermometer for about $50. I recommend the mini temps,
most have a laser pointer so you can see where you are reading the
temperature.

These are generally available at higher end auto parts places; I've seen
techs use them and it is amazing.......


You'll just scan the house and you'll see the actual
temperature on the readout. You won't get the big picture, but you'll get
the job done for a lot less. Mine (Raytek MT4) has an 8 to 1 beam spread
(1' circle at 8' distance, or 1" at 8") but you can get them tighter.
Don't go broader.

You can look for gaps in insulation or even air leaks around doors. Highly
usefull.

Jeff


aem sends...

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:11:18 -0500, "daestrom"
wrote:


Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY
sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd be
worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited repair funds at the
worst leaks.


Another cheap alternative, *IF* you have a 35mm film camera (not digital) is
to buy some infrared film and take pictures. Have to wait until they're
back from developing, but not too bad. Google '35mm infrared film'.

Film doesn't go anywhere nearly low enough to capture ambient IR. It's response is
better than CCDs but nowhere near low enough to capture ambient radiation in the 8 to
14 micron range. Even if the chemistry were possible, the film isn't for the obvious
reason - it would instantly be fogged by the thermal radiation emitted by itself and
everything around it.

Here's an article that covers the technical aspects of IR photography.

http://msp.rmit.edu.au/Article_03/02e.html

A photo that every IR buff has to take at some point in his "career" is that of a hot
clothes iron. If the iron is turned as hot as it will go (modern irons crippled with
lawyeritis might not even go that hot) looks like an eerie glowing object that has to
be radioactive. It isn't visible to IR film until it is at almost full heat.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
Democracy is three wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:14:45 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein wrote:


You might have heard the screams about five years
ago when Sony's camcorders, when in "nightshot"
mode, could "see through clothing". THe reality
is that the sensors could pck up "near infra-red".

Many materials that look "black" are really very, very,
dark red - letting a teensy bit of visible red
through (so small it looks blackish) but a modest
amount of near infra-red. So these cameras could
kind of, in some instances, maybe... look "through"
those fabrics - if they were thin enough.

That camera and any other with the IR cut filter removed and a low pass optical
filter installed work (quite well, actually) to image through clothes for the simple
reason that many fabrics are transparent to shortwave IR. The camera doesn't image
body heat. It images reflected IR that passes through the cloth. Cotton and wool
are essentially opaque. Light synthetics like rayon are transparent.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
I love cats ... they taste just like chicken.

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:42:25 GMT, aemeijers wrote:

Anthony Matonak wrote:
danny burstein wrote:
In aemeijers
writes:
Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one
(ANY sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for
me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my limited
repair funds at the worst leaks.

For the hell of it, call your local fire department
folk. They just might have one.

You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

Anthony
Okay- a quick Google shows entry-level models of those start at around a
hundred bucks. Cute, but kind of steep for a one-time-use tool.

Have you got a link to that camera?

I have been thinking of getting one, but found they were way to
expensive.

If I get a guy with a proper camera to come around, it will set me
back at least 300, and then I have to pay again to verify the results.

Even if it's less accurate, it should give very good indication, and I
can do it at my own time and pace.

--
SEE YA !!!
Trygve Lillefosse
AKA - Malawi, The Fisher King

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 00:09:48 -0500, "Don K"
wrote:

"aemeijers" wrote in message
...

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY sort of IR
camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to
be able to target my limited repair funds at the worst leaks.

Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Unfortunately, they can only be converted to near infaread(light) nor
far infaread(heat).

--
SEE YA !!!
Trygve Lillefosse
AKA - Malawi, The Fisher King

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:12:18 -0500, Neon John wrote:

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:14:45 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein wrote:


You might have heard the screams about five years
ago when Sony's camcorders, when in "nightshot"
mode, could "see through clothing". THe reality
is that the sensors could pck up "near infra-red".

Many materials that look "black" are really very, very,
dark red - letting a teensy bit of visible red
through (so small it looks blackish) but a modest
amount of near infra-red. So these cameras could
kind of, in some instances, maybe... look "through"
those fabrics - if they were thin enough.

That camera and any other with the IR cut filter removed and a low pass optical
filter installed work (quite well, actually) to image through clothes for the simple
reason that many fabrics are transparent to shortwave IR. The camera doesn't image
body heat. It images reflected IR that passes through the cloth. Cotton and wool
are essentially opaque. Light synthetics like rayon are transparent.

Just have to add that you can get a tan with a T-shirt on, it only
takes quite a bit longer than without.

--
SEE YA !!!
Trygve Lillefosse
AKA - Malawi, The Fisher King

"Trygve Lillefosse" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 00:09:48 -0500, "Don K"
wrote:

"aemeijers" wrote in message
...

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one (ANY sort of IR
camera), and could come out and do a walkaround for me. It'd be worth a C-note to me
to
be able to target my limited repair funds at the worst leaks.

Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Unfortunately, they can only be converted to near infaread(light) nor
far infaread(heat).

Oh well. I thought we were onto something.
So near, and yet so far.

Don

Huh . . . I used to build 'em back in the late 70's & early 80's for the
military . . .
They'd pay between $250,000 and $1.4 million, depending on the bells &
whistles that came with 'em.

Prices have certainly dropped . . .

Neon John wrote:
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:04:47 GMT, aemeijers wrote:


Some digital cameras and webcams already respond to IR.

There are various instructions around on how to convert them into IR cameras.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/395292...igital_camera/

No thanks are necessary. Just send me the C-note.

Don



Interesting- a 'Red Green' solar eclipse/welding viewer. Too bad my toy
digital doesn't have a protruding lens. I'll have to stare at my digital
camera and my box of old odd fittings from my collection of 'real' (aka
film) cameras and see if anything jumps out at me.


The IR response of a digital camera is useless for thermal imaging. This response
maybe extends as far downward as 1.2 microns. Thermal imaging cameras respond to
very long wave IR in the 8 to 14 micron range. The usual imager is an array of
microbolometers that measures actual heating at each pixel and not a CCD or CMOS
device. The better ones use cooled arrays to reduce ambient thermal noise.

The reason thermal imagers are so expensive is that glass cannot be used for lens
material, as it doesn't pass longwave radiation. The traditional lens material is
pure germanium. Just the lens for the thermal imager I used to own cost almost $20k.
I understand that calcium fluoride has become a popular lens material and is
responsible for driving the cost down.

Fascinating.

I wonder if anyone has made any lenses of polyethelene, it's the only
plastic I know of that's transparent to IR. Perhaps that's what my IR
thermometer lens is made of...

Jeff

One other comment while I'm here. Handheld or fixed mount IR imaging cameras are NOT
FLIR, though there is a company that as adopted the military acronym as its name.
Forward Looking InfraRed refers to the technology used on planes and helicopters. The
imaging system used in these applications is as much different from the handheld
units as a handycam is to an HiDef studio camera.

I once bought two FLIRs for one of the "B" bombers (B1 or B2, I can't recall now) at
a DMRO surplus sale. Probably one of those sales of strategically sensitive
technology that Congress got its panties in a wad about.

This thing was over 4 ft long and probably 2 ft in diameter and required a forklift
to move. All the optics were germanium including the massive objective lens that was
probably a foot in diameter. It had cooled gold-plated copper AZ-EL mirrors on
frighteningly fast servo mechanisms. The imager itself was cooled somehow -
thermoelectric or sterling, probably. My casual testing showed that it could resolve
a half a degree F between two bodies.

The output was incredible. No smearing or blooming like civilian imagers. Razor
sharp crispness. Full 30 hz frame rate. It had several video output formats
including composite which I used to drive a B&W monitor.

I played with one of them for awhile and then sold them for mucho $$$ to a PCB
manufacturing company that used them for high speed inspection of boards during
burn-in.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
Risk: $20 hooker, year old condom.

aemeijers wrote:
Les Cargill wrote:

aemeijers wrote:

Anthony Matonak wrote:

danny burstein wrote:

In
aemeijers writes:

Now if I could just find a company in this small town that had one
(ANY sort of IR camera), and could come out and do a walkaround
for me. It'd be worth a C-note to me to be able to target my
limited repair funds at the worst leaks.


For the hell of it, call your local fire department
folk. They just might have one.


You might be able to do almost as well using a non-contact thermometer.
Go out on a cold night and scan the likely places, like around windows
and doors. It's slower but works on the same principle.

Anthony

Okay- a quick Google shows entry-level models of those start at
around a hundred bucks. Cute, but kind of steep for a one-time-use tool.


Uh... no.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=93983

Thanks- that is cheap enough to be plausible. I'll add it to my 'toys to
buy' list. (At that price point, I'm sure it isn't lab or milspec
quality, but as long as it shows hot or cold spots, that is all that
really matters.)

aem sends....

They were recently on sale for half price. I bought one. It seems to
work quite well.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form .

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Video via http://Muvy.org


Why don't you stop spamming us with your site, and just start providing the
link to the actual information?

Ron Purvis wrote:

"Joe" wrote in message
roups.com...


Video via http://Muvy.SPAMorg




Why don't you stop spamming us with your site, and just start providing the
link to the actual information?




Because every hit to his spam site makes him money.