Jump to content

Thermal imaging and foxes


turbo33
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sure I will get torn to bits, but here goes!

It seems that the days when the old skills of waiting up for a fox or squeaking it in on the back of a hand are vanishing at the speed of light. To be replaced by night vision and now, thermal imaging scopes. Where once you would lie in wait for Charlie to appear alongside the release pens and accounting for him was a good night, now, with TI, a reasonable night is 5+ and two accounts I've heard recently are 60+ on two different farms in less than two weeks. Realistically an un sustainable cull figure for the future of foxes.

 

I know, there will be a plethora of replies, pest control, if you don't like it get the knitting needles out etc. But I'm a country boy,  and like to see things in balance. Obviously all things managed, for the sake of wildlife, jobs etc. But total wipeout with sophisticated equipment for the sake of a target or kill? 

So lets discuss........

 

Edited by turbo33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Me personally I do a mixture of both .

I still  sit out on smaller permissions, hand squeak and get the thrill of the possibility of a Fox showing up and get reasonable results especially last light in the summer  .

On the flip side thermal/NV/Fox callers  etc has totally changed my pest/vermin control in the last year or so to the extent one large permission it's very rare now to see a Fox, due to relentlessly shooting week in week out all year around.

I find now some farmers/landowners expect results and at times fast which is where modern shooting equipment comes into play .

I enjoy the sitting out at dusk in a old school way more , but a job has to be done at times .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't shed a tear if they were banned. Tools of the devil in my mind.

What makes me really chuckle is the number of people who jump on the "not sporting" hobby horse when pontificating about game shooting or deer stalking, but happily use and condone the use of night vision and TI on other quarry species.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must admit I'm with the OP babs and Charlie here.

I must admit I'm amazed at the number of folk that have them now at the price they are (and the amount for sale after 4-6 weeks), its a massive expense to justify.

Fair enough if ur FT pest controller or a big estate with 1 between a few keepers, ut I still now quite a few keepers who still lamp.

 

Plus when u learn to use 1 of those u'll never learn the ticks and field craft u had too to be successful with a lamp and all those skills will be lost.

 

I also worry about safety issues with these things,not because there unsafe themselves, but many folk will only have it in there rifle so will have to scan fields with the rifle.

I did buy a cheap homemade NV spotter but to be honest I still like the old fashioned way of lamp/full moon/binos, so that I'm never tempted to use my rifle for scanning/spotting.

I mind many years ago and I got my 1st ever scope mounted lamp for the air gun really did not feel safe even with an air gun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your job (and therefore house etc) depends on keeping several thousand poults safe, I can understand why professional keepers and free range poultry farms etc use the best tools available. Let's face it, thermal and NV do give you an edge. However if you are just doing it for "sport" or like I do, on the shoot I keeper part time, I find it more rewarding to put the work into squeaking a fox into range and using any advantage you can get like wind or a fold in the ground to outwit them. My best night with a lamp is 5, and we took 14 off my 650ac this year so far, and suffered no real problem with them during release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An excellent tool for the professional who must get results, and there is no reason to criticise them for taking advantage of the latest aids to their job.  Anyone foxing as a hobby, well its up to them what method they use as long as they manage to cull enough head to satisfy their landowner.

 

Blackpowder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long gone are the days when I went lamping, using a 12v car battery, carried in a rucksack type bag, and a 12v car headlight attached to a piece of wood. Battery acid usually leaked onto my trousers which then fell apart!

Today, I use NV and electronic callers, plus 'rocking rabbit' decoy. I also intend to get a thermal spotter 'one day'. But I still enjoy using a lamp. Two of us go to the farms, and we take it in turn to use the lamp. Spotting one, calling it in by hand, or homemade caller (2 lollypop sticks with plastic in between) and watching it (hopefully) coming into range, is still a good way in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got in from beating on an estate that I do fox control on, no foxs came out on any of the 5 drives. For the keeper it's an excellent result added to a fair bag of pheasants. And the shoot owner is also happy that the guns see that the vermin control is being carried out as expected. Thermal does give you the edge, I've had a few off there that I would not have seen without the Thermal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29 November 2017 at 20:52, fruity said:

Me personally I do a mixture of both .

I still  sit out on smaller permissions, hand squeak and get the thrill of the possibility of a Fox showing up and get reasonable results especially last light in the summer  .

On the flip side thermal/NV/Fox callers  etc has totally changed my pest/vermin control in the last year or so to the extent one large permission it's very rare now to see a Fox, due to relentlessly shooting week in week out all year around.

I find now some farmers/landowners expect results and at times fast which is where modern shooting equipment comes into play .

I enjoy the sitting out at dusk in a old school way more , but a job has to be done at times .

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to say there's lots of points here from people who've obviously never used thermal, and their perception of it differs significantly from reality. From a thermal spotting perspective (as opposed to a thermal scope) it's simply another form of spotting a fox using artificial means. From a field-skills view, it doesn't mask your scent, it doesn't attract foxes in closer, doesn't hide noise, and as far as safety's concerned, if using a thermal spotter it's infinitely safer than using a lamp. Get your mate to go and sit behind a hedge in a cammo jacket and try to spot him with a lamp, or even in daylight, then try and spot him with a thermal (day or night) - which one do you think will blow the other out of the water as far as safety? I don't know anyone who'd scan with a thermal rifle scope - a) it's incredibly dangerous, but mainly b) the logical first choice is a thermal spotter, then a thermal scope if desired. There's no point forking out for a thermal rifle scope and have to spot with a lamp or IR.  My own setup is thermal spotting and IR shooting. This enables me to cover the land on foot with relative ease as, overall the complete package is easily man-portable and easily used by one person - that in itself will increase your shot number because it's far more discreet than two guys yammering to each other and shooting off the back of a pickup with a lamp. 

Yes, you can employ different tactics with a thermal once you start getting call-shy foxes (you'd be amazed to see how many foxes are more call-shy than lamp-shy). If you spot a fox working a field in the distance, providing your field skills are sufficient you can get into position to cut him off. With a lamp you nearly always have to call them in, but after you've used thermal you'll get a good understanding of how many foxes won't come to a call (using a lamp you always think they're lamp-shy!). There are plenty of times where you'll still have to just sit and wait for charlie. It's also much more stock-friendly, but another massive bonus with thermal is you don't have plod turning up every bloody minute because some AR fruitloop or 'concerned neighbour' has seen the lamp and called the police!

From my own perspective, I control foxes for Welsh hill farms on about 3,000 acres. Many of these farms lamb outdoors and can suffer incredible lamb-loss in a year if foxes are about on the permission. My aim is always to clear the foxes on a specific permission, starting in August, then removing any new foxes as they move in through the winter. By the time lambing, and just as importantly fox-breeding season comes around, with the use of thermal and IR I've generally been able to keep the immediate area either fox-free or reduced to such a degree that I can actually stop going out shooting by March. Thus I can leave the foxes in peace to rear their cubs. I HATE having to shoot a vixen with dependent cubs in the earth. The only time that does, sadly happen is when I get a new farm call that's losing lambs. I'm never a big fan of starting on a permission so late in my shooting year - I'll deal with the fox(es) but make it abundantly clear to the landowner that next year, he deals with the foxes in September. the following year it all starts again, by August foxes from the surrounding area are dispersing back onto my permissions, numbers are back to where they were the year before and foxes will continue to come in all Winter. Ultimately is doesn't affect fox population as a whole, it's a localised reduction in specific permissions.

As far as morally questionable - it gets the job done far more effectively, and safer than using a lamp, that's what I'm there to do - not just shoot the odd one for a bit of sport. But if you walk about a perm like a yeti, fag in gob, yammering like a pair of women all it will do is enable you to see the foxes bolting in the opposite direction, as you don't need eye-shine. Yes, i get that for some they're prohibitively expensive, but that is no justification for questioning their ethics, nor their safety. Shooting a fox with a high velocity rifle round when the fox is illuminated by light in the visible spectrum for humans is acceptable, but using the same gun on the same fox in a spectrum too high for humans to detect is therefore morally questionable? Really, have you seriously thought that through? From the fox's perspective why is one acceptable and the other not? Whose conscience are you trying to sooth here. Another thing that often surprises me - quotes such as "there needs to be a balance", or "everything needs a chance", then they'll happily shoot foxes all year round. Nothing wrong or illegal with that, I don't do it, I won't condemn it, but similarly I won't try to ride some "questionable ethics through equipment choice" arbitrary clap-trap on the back of it either.

For what it's worth, I'm not a big fan of thermal rifle scopes. Seen too many farm sheepdogs running around in thermal and the heat signature of one of those and a fox at 200 yards is virtually identical, it's not for any arbitrary moral ambiguity.  Fox is confirmed with a X15 ir Drone. Thermal is rarely a starting point, it's a progression, so many of those skills learned through the use of the lamp are carried over to thermal. I've noticed what does irk some is the perception that high numbers are shot by people using thermal simply because of the equipment they're using, but from experience, they'd most likely have higher success rate than others when using a lamp also. I've been looking through the spotter at some using a lamp on a neighboring farm and I'm surprised they shoot anything! I've seen fags in gobs, heard phones ringing, faces lit-up like Blackpool tower to name a few. :lol:

Fox control, like that of any pest species (Invasive non-native excluded) has to be effective but not detrimental to the long-term viability of the species as a whole for it to be morally justifiable, otherwise it can be viewed (and often is, by some)  as just shooting for fun - and, rightly or wrongly, in today's society, that's becoming an ever-increasingly difficult (and tiresome) argument to counter. Reading it on here of all places, it's starting to feel like the toil of Sisyphus.

A little anecdote regarding the perception that using IR and thermal is 'easy'. I picked a permission up two years ago, in March. The farmer had lost 14 lambs in ten nights, and the lad who was trying to find it, with a lamp and a Landrover couldn't find it. I got to the lambing field at 7pm, it was already below freezing, and picked a spot under an oak tree on the boundary of the field, and waited, and waited, and waited. I wasn't going to risk any calling, as after using thermal for 3 years now, I know full well it can send a fox in the opposite direction and I really needed to bag this one, and he WOULD show up sooner or later. At 1:00, a full 6 hours later, charlie makes an appearance in the top corner of the field and makes his way to the first ewe with twins. It was his last move. Now, do you think the lad with the lamp and the landie should doff his cap at that fox for being out-done? Perhaps, but tell that to the farmer who's losing lambs every night. Please don't tell me shooting with thermal and IR is 'easy', it just demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what it does, and more importantly, what it doesn't do.

Edited by racing snake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/12/2017 at 11:07, racing snake said:

 

Fox control, like that of any pest species (Invasive non-native excluded) has to be effective but not detrimental to the long-term viability of the species as a whole for it to be morally justifiable, otherwise it can be viewed (and often is, by some)  as just shooting for fun - and, rightly or wrongly, in today's society, that's becoming an ever-increasingly difficult (and tiresome) argument to counter. Reading it on here of all places, it's starting to feel like the toil of Sisyphus.

 

But, the vast majority of fox shooting is done for fun.

Foxing has become a sport in its own right, with many of those whose hobby this is, spending vast amounts of money on equipment to give them every conceivable advantage. 

I would suggest that TI, whilst extremely effective, is indeed detrimental to the long term viability of the fox population.

As a large sheep farmer, I can honestly say that I would view it as a very sad day indeed if I never saw a fox out and about. Wildlife management is just that, managing wildlife and keeping it in balance. Whilst I pull my hair out when a rogue fox persistently takes lambs, I would never condone the use of TI to try and eradicate every fox in the parish, which is something that will happen if every hobby shooter uses TI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CharlieT said:

But, the vast majority of fox shooting is done for fun.

Foxing has become a sport in its own right, with many of those whose hobby this is, spending vast amounts of money on equipment to give them every conceivable advantage. 

I would suggest that TI, whilst extremely effective, is indeed detrimental to the long term viability of the fox population.

As a large sheep farmer, I can honestly say that I would view it as a very sad day indeed if I never saw a fox out and about. Wildlife management is just that, managing wildlife and keeping it in balance. Whilst I pull my hair out when a rogue fox persistently takes lambs, I would never condone the use of TI to try and eradicate every fox in the parish, which is something that will happen if every hobby shooter uses TI.

Then you should separate sweeping statements regarding your view of their ethics (and legality) as a device in isolation to a more accurate one of what the intention of the person using it is (anyone on this thread just shooting foxes purely "for fun"?). Believe you me, the perception of foxes being shot purely for entertainment as opposed to a means to an end will have a far more detrimental impact on fox shooting than the use of thermal in the long-run. I don't shoot any 'for fun', I shoot them because I've been specifically asked to by the landowner.

I agree with you regarding it being a sad day if no foxes are seen on a particular area, and as I've pointed out to you, after using thermal for 3 years I can allay those fears by confirming it doesn't happen, especially if you give yourself a shooting season. If you allow 365 day shooting on your land then I'm sorry, but your concern for the use of thermal doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

As a sheep farmer you're perfectly entitled to your view, based on how their presence, and in what numbers, affects your livelihood, you need to accept that you can't use those experiences as a metric for every other sheep farmer. I notice you farm in Exmoor, I'm sure you appreciate that in your part of the world, the relatively benign impact you say you have from foxes is with the backdrop of some pretty extensive control by game shooting interests, many of whom will be using thermal.

Edited by racing snake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With respect, unless you personally suffer financial loss from fox depredation or your livelihood is dependent on no such losses, then you are shooting foxes as a hobby you enjoy. If you didn't enjoy it, why on earth would you spend so much of your hard earned cash for the benefit of someone else. However, if your motives and such generous expenditure are truly altruistic then I applaud you, except of course, the use of TI.

I have never said I agree or condone the use of TI in any circumstances, I do not agree with its use whilst shooting, period. 

Oh, and just for the record, I don't permit others shooting on my land. I do so myself, if and when required, without the need for TI or a self imposed closed season to provide myself with future sport. 

On the subject of self imposed closed seasons, I really fail to understand how such a thing works. Certainly around here, with lambs vulnerable till may and pheasant poults arriving in June, a closed season is impractical and nothing more than a sop to the wider public in the vain hope they will allow you and others to continue your hobby.

Me, I just want to be able to kill problematic foxes at whatever time of the year they cause problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're intentionally distorting what's been written now CharlieT. I never said I didn't 'enjoy' shooting foxes, I said that's not my specific and singular motivation. I don't shoot them 'just for fun' I am the landowners' 'Authorised person' to control foxes and I'll do it as safely and effectively as I can, all within the constraints of the law.

Judging by the rest of your post, you'll have to forgive me but it appears what you're more concerned about is that all fox shooters throughout the country abide by your arbitrary set of regulations. My advice (heed it or ignore it, your choice) would be to continue to shoot/control predators as you see fit, depending on your own specific set of circumstances, and maybe take a break from telling everyone else how they should do it. There's no evidence to support the assumption that the use of thermal is having a detrimental impact on the viability of the fox population, so it's all a bit of a moot point.

Edited by racing snake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP posed, for discussion, the question of NV and TI. I merely replied I am not in favor of TI.

Please forgive me for my view and stating my position.

I now appreciate your view is obviously the correct one and therefore the subject should not be open for discussion. I apologise profusely for doing so.

I'm off out now to feed my cows and calves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, CharlieT said:

The OP posed, for discussion, the question of NV and TI. I merely replied I am not in favor of TI.

Please forgive me for my view and stating my position.

I now appreciate your view is obviously the correct one and therefore the subject should not be open for discussion. I apologise profusely for doing so.

I'm off out now to feed my cows and calves.

I'd hardly call "tools of the devil' and 'should be banned' (and little else) as any form of constructive and informative dialogue based on demonstrable evidence CharlieT. That's little more than glib sarcasm.

Some have given their view of the use of thermal imaging, predominately based on zero experience of using it. I've attempted to enlighten some of the glaring errors in those assumptions based on using it for a reasonable amount of time. I'll probably finish to say, if they were £100 a pop everyone would have one, I'd say including those who shown reluctance thus far - perhaps even you CharlieT. It would certainly help you deal with that problematic fox that occasionally appears. How far you go with it after that? Entirely up to you, you're the one pointing the business end of the gun.

Edited by racing snake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since changing from lamp to NV I've saved the company I work for £1000s possibly £10,000s  there was nothing worse than sitting for 6 or7 hours waiting for a fox only for it to run at the first flick of the lamp. Now with NV I know if it turns up its dead. Never tried TI but I cannot see it being an advantage for me as I know exact 100x100 yard area where the fox is going to come to .also not sure how well a fox would show up against 20-30,000 geese on each field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30 November 2017 at 16:36, steve_b_wales said:

Long gone are the days when I went lamping, using a 12v car battery, carried in a rucksack type bag, and a 12v car headlight attached to a piece of wood. Battery acid usually leaked onto my trousers which then fell apart!

Today, I use NV and electronic callers, plus 'rocking rabbit' decoy. I also intend to get a thermal spotter 'one day'. But I still enjoy using a lamp. Two of us go to the farms, and we take it in turn to use the lamp. Spotting one, calling it in by hand, or homemade caller (2 lollypop sticks with plastic in between) and watching it (hopefully) coming into range, is still a good way in my opinion.

The lamp is also my way Steve - it has been for the past 55 years and always will be, I'm too old to change my ways now! ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have gone down the TH rout as well the times i have used my Archer Nv and seen the Fox or Boar look straight at the IR and dont tell me they cant see the IR because they can i now use the Archer to spot and then switch to Thermal and as Racing snake said you put any living thing  behind what you are aiming at even if its behind the hedge other side of the field and you see it thermal is the future 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rim Fire,

I certainly agree about them seeing NV ir's, but to be honest Fox's don't much time to register and get their running shoes on. Spot with thermal, point rifle in right direction then ir and NV on then just squeeze the trigger. All that takes is a couple of seconds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2017 at 21:40, Dougy said:

Rim Fire,

I certainly agree about them seeing NV ir's, but to be honest Fox's don't much time to register and get their running shoes on. Spot with thermal, point rifle in right direction then ir and NV on then just squeeze the trigger. All that takes is a couple of seconds. 

I think thats the difference Doughy spotting with thermal rather spotting with an IR unit with us down this end  they are used to a Red beam when they see the IR they think here we go again so they take flight as you say spotting with thermal they dont see anything you having a few up there

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/12/2017 at 11:07, racing snake said:

Sorry to say there's lots of points here from people who've obviously never used thermal, and their perception of it differs significantly from reality. From a thermal spotting perspective (as opposed to a thermal scope) it's simply another form of spotting a fox using artificial means. From a field-skills view, it doesn't mask your scent, it doesn't attract foxes in closer, doesn't hide noise, and as far as safety's concerned, if using a thermal spotter it's infinitely safer than using a lamp. Get your mate to go and sit behind a hedge in a cammo jacket and try to spot him with a lamp, or even in daylight, then try and spot him with a thermal (day or night) - which one do you think will blow the other out of the water as far as safety? I don't know anyone who'd scan with a thermal rifle scope - a) it's incredibly dangerous, but mainly b) the logical first choice is a thermal spotter, then a thermal scope if desired. There's no point forking out for a thermal rifle scope and have to spot with a lamp or IR.  My own setup is thermal spotting and IR shooting. This enables me to cover the land on foot with relative ease as, overall the complete package is easily man-portable and easily used by one person - that in itself will increase your shot number because it's far more discreet than two guys yammering to each other and shooting off the back of a pickup with a lamp. 

Yes, you can employ different tactics with a thermal once you start getting call-shy foxes (you'd be amazed to see how many foxes are more call-shy than lamp-shy). If you spot a fox working a field in the distance, providing your field skills are sufficient you can get into position to cut him off. With a lamp you nearly always have to call them in, but after you've used thermal you'll get a good understanding of how many foxes won't come to a call (using a lamp you always think they're lamp-shy!). There are plenty of times where you'll still have to just sit and wait for charlie. It's also much more stock-friendly, but another massive bonus with thermal is you don't have plod turning up every bloody minute because some AR fruitloop or 'concerned neighbour' has seen the lamp and called the police!

From my own perspective, I control foxes for Welsh hill farms on about 3,000 acres. Many of these farms lamb outdoors and can suffer incredible lamb-loss in a year if foxes are about on the permission. My aim is always to clear the foxes on a specific permission, starting in August, then removing any new foxes as they move in through the winter. By the time lambing, and just as importantly fox-breeding season comes around, with the use of thermal and IR I've generally been able to keep the immediate area either fox-free or reduced to such a degree that I can actually stop going out shooting by March. Thus I can leave the foxes in peace to rear their cubs. I HATE having to shoot a vixen with dependent cubs in the earth. The only time that does, sadly happen is when I get a new farm call that's losing lambs. I'm never a big fan of starting on a permission so late in my shooting year - I'll deal with the fox(es) but make it abundantly clear to the landowner that next year, he deals with the foxes in September. the following year it all starts again, by August foxes from the surrounding area are dispersing back onto my permissions, numbers are back to where they were the year before and foxes will continue to come in all Winter. Ultimately is doesn't affect fox population as a whole, it's a localised reduction in specific permissions.

As far as morally questionable - it gets the job done far more effectively, and safer than using a lamp, that's what I'm there to do - not just shoot the odd one for a bit of sport. But if you walk about a perm like a yeti, fag in gob, yammering like a pair of women all it will do is enable you to see the foxes bolting in the opposite direction, as you don't need eye-shine. Yes, i get that for some they're prohibitively expensive, but that is no justification for questioning their ethics, nor their safety. Shooting a fox with a high velocity rifle round when the fox is illuminated by light in the visible spectrum for humans is acceptable, but using the same gun on the same fox in a spectrum too high for humans to detect is therefore morally questionable? Really, have you seriously thought that through? From the fox's perspective why is one acceptable and the other not? Whose conscience are you trying to sooth here. Another thing that often surprises me - quotes such as "there needs to be a balance", or "everything needs a chance", then they'll happily shoot foxes all year round. Nothing wrong or illegal with that, I don't do it, I won't condemn it, but similarly I won't try to ride some "questionable ethics through equipment choice" arbitrary clap-trap on the back of it either.

For what it's worth, I'm not a big fan of thermal rifle scopes. Seen too many farm sheepdogs running around in thermal and the heat signature of one of those and a fox at 200 yards is virtually identical, it's not for any arbitrary moral ambiguity.  Fox is confirmed with a X15 ir Drone. Thermal is rarely a starting point, it's a progression, so many of those skills learned through the use of the lamp are carried over to thermal. I've noticed what does irk some is the perception that high numbers are shot by people using thermal simply because of the equipment they're using, but from experience, they'd most likely have higher success rate than others when using a lamp also. I've been looking through the spotter at some using a lamp on a neighboring farm and I'm surprised they shoot anything! I've seen fags in gobs, heard phones ringing, faces lit-up like Blackpool tower to name a few. :lol:

Fox control, like that of any pest species (Invasive non-native excluded) has to be effective but not detrimental to the long-term viability of the species as a whole for it to be morally justifiable, otherwise it can be viewed (and often is, by some)  as just shooting for fun - and, rightly or wrongly, in today's society, that's becoming an ever-increasingly difficult (and tiresome) argument to counter. Reading it on here of all places, it's starting to feel like the toil of Sisyphus.

A little anecdote regarding the perception that using IR and thermal is 'easy'. I picked a permission up two years ago, in March. The farmer had lost 14 lambs in ten nights, and the lad who was trying to find it, with a lamp and a Landrover couldn't find it. I got to the lambing field at 7pm, it was already below freezing, and picked a spot under an oak tree on the boundary of the field, and waited, and waited, and waited. I wasn't going to risk any calling, as after using thermal for 3 years now, I know full well it can send a fox in the opposite direction and I really needed to bag this one, and he WOULD show up sooner or later. At 1:00, a full 6 hours later, charlie makes an appearance in the top corner of the field and makes his way to the first ewe with twins. It was his last move. Now, do you think the lad with the lamp and the landie should doff his cap at that fox for being out-done? Perhaps, but tell that to the farmer who's losing lambs every night. Please don't tell me shooting with thermal and IR is 'easy', it just demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what it does, and more importantly, what it doesn't do.

excellent post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...