Originally posted by Artemis:
I worked on the early infrared cameras that are now in common use on aircraft and helicopters, and in general they aren't sensitive enough to distinguish Clark from a human that is running. He's hotter, but he'd have to be almost hot enough to burn someone else to alert any software in a delta change. The image doesn't have enough thermal resolution to tell the difference.
But go for a story anyway.
Artemis Not sure that's still true. I have a catalogue here with several hand-held thermal imaging cameras, as used by central heating engineers etc, the screen shows an area equivalent to a normal sort of camera viewfinder, and the exact temperature at the crosshairs in the middle of the screen, with a claimed accuracy of 0.1 degrees. That's the cheap model, with resolution about equivalent to a cheap webcam, costs about £1700 (around $2500), which makes them affordable by keen hobbyists. It uses standard SD cards so you can take photos and they are saved with all of the data on temperature. There are more expensive cameras with higher sensor resolution, of course.
A few years ago one of the London papers published photos of various well-known public buildings showing how much heat they were wasting. Now if Jimmy was given a similar assignment and played with the camera in the office, got a picture that included Clark, and then got the chance to image Superman and noticed the identical temperature...
