Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: IQ180 frustrations.

  1. #1
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    IQ180 frustrations.

    I'll admit I've never really not been frustrated with my IQ180. My first one had color cast problems so severe it required an LCC even with the DF/28, 45, and 55 combinations, and also with the Alpa even with the 70mm Rodenstock. they swapped it, but still not great, and one reason I gave up on the technical camera is I really didn't want to shoot an LCC with pretty much every shot. I could get away with it using the 70mm and 120mm rodenstock, although most of the time with the 70 I felt it needed it.

    I still frequently get issues that are frustrating, especially when I want to do some major adjustments. It seems now if I have to work over a sky pretty heavily, I"m in trouble, even C1 can't seem to map the 8 sensors correctly. I get all kinds of problems with what appears to be very subtle vertical magenta banding, and the middle seam will almost always show up. If I move into photoshop and work the file some more, it gets worse so I find myself doing things to "fix" it.

    Will a recalibration help this? Is it too much to expect to get a perfect density/color match where the sensors are joined? Does anyone else fight some issues even with the DF and color casts?


    this is a small crop from a sky output from C1 - this is the middle seam, not over towards an edge. I'm also fighting the magenta blotchiness that you can sort of see in this. A lot of my web jpegs show this in grey skies.
    Last edited by Wayne Fox; 25th March 2012 at 18:34.
    wayne
    My gallery

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    876
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Which firmeware are you using ? Or better with what firmware was that image shot?

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    I think you are referring to the so called "tiling" issue which is inherent in all of the IQ backs which have 8 stitched smaller chips.
    I have a very professional large format camera user and he has 2 IQ180s and he had to use them only for interior shots because both of the backs suffer heavily from tiling problem.In addition to this,he has been trying to solve the problem with Phase Company,the respond he got is his backs were calibrated well enough and all of the backs have tiling problem to such a degree,this should be condidered in acceptable levels.
    Therefore,I think recalibration might help but not 100 percent.
    Good luck,

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Most importantly can you see this issue in a print of any kind? That's my bottom line and I print pretty large as I know you do. I have no issues with my 180 but have not looked at very pastel areas of an image at 100% or beyond.

    As for the DF...... that's a whole other issue.

    Victor

  5. #5
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Wayne, when you say a small crop from output, do you mean this is actually visible in the processed TIFF? Or are you seeing it only in the 100% preview in C1? Next question is what ISO was that at -- I only ever see that sort or noise pattern at 100% view in relatively high ISO shots 400 or over normal, 1600 or over for S+.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    876
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    It probably is visible in print and in the TIFF file. Just my guess. My experience is that the IQ180 aren't as perfect as the P65 generation was.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Wayne,

    I checked some of my 180 LCC files which are about as pastel as I can get. I opened up the files in either ACR or C1 and have looked for tile boundaries but can't find any even at 500% magnification.

    If you like I can supply a raw file for your inspection.

    Victor

  8. #8
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher View Post
    It probably is visible in print and in the TIFF file. Just my guess. My experience is that the IQ180 aren't as perfect as the P65 generation was.
    If it is, then IMHO he needs a new calibration file -- I have never seen anything like in my output files EXCEPT at S+ 3200, and even then, it absolutely did not show in a 4x enlarged print!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Near Brussels, Belgium, Europe
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Before purchasing my 180 I did test the demo one of my dealer. Same issue on some Cambo + 35mm Schneider shots (processed with LCC for technical cam). Not all the shots were problematic. But those with strong color cast were the most obvious.
    I believed it was a specific problem of the demo system and ordered mine.
    Before being delivered I saw that other users encounters that problem too and started to worry about that issue quite much.
    Fortunately my current IQ180 seem totally exempt of that problem. Did not see it after 2000 shots taken with all kinds of lenses.
    So saying that all IQ180 have that issue is untrue...

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    876
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    My first back had it quite strongly, my second back still has it with difficult light. Now Phase has said, it is gone with the current firmware. I haven't had time to check it. You can see it with the old firmware in this shot. Left hand side. aboth the castle. It sill makes a stunning 1 by 2 meter print and normal people don't even notice it.


  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    I've seen similar problems with my P65+, but only when I push the image saturation, and even then, only occasionally. When I have noticed it, the problem was not present in adjacent frames, so I wondered if it might be related to heat or lingering charges.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    After extreme adjustment on my LCC file I was able to finally see the tile edges. This was after an extreme curve adjustment that I would never have attempted on any file that I have ever taken. Again I will supply you with raw files taken with my back for your inspection...... it may be helpful.

    Victor

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,033
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher View Post
    You can see it with the old firmware in this shot. Left hand side. aboth the castle.

    Maybe you could point out the line..... I don't see it anywhere. What are you showing here?

    Victor

  14. #14
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Yes, I can see it in prints, as well as on the screen. It shows also when I downrez to web size, although I've done some repair work to minimize it on a couple of files. The magenta issues usually creates magenta/cyan artifacts when downsized to small web jpegs, something I've never seen until now. These were taken at ISO 35, exposure in the area in question is good, mid to lighter tone grey range. of course it doesn't show much until I try to make some contrast/density adjustments. It certainly isn't noticeable in the majority of my images.

    Have sent a raw file off to Phase One to get their opinion. It seems every once in a while I get an image that something odd happens, here's one from last summer where lens flare cause this magenta cast. This isn't extreme flare, nothing is close to blown, but you can see the magenta color in the rocks. I'm sure it's a combination of the flare and the sensor, maybe unavoidable. I've seen this a few other times, once with my first IQ180 was just in some water at the bottom of an image (same general location) definitely no flare in involved in that shot.. This is the 28mm, 1.3 seconds ISO 35. (older firmware, 2.01 I think)
    wayne
    My gallery

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    When I have gotten really analytical about my own IQ180, it has its little issues. Here is an LCC image after tech wide angle correction, transformed to gray, and with all sorts of manipulation to accentuate fine transitions. I also show a measured profile taken from an unmanipulated image.

    If we think of the camera as outputting gray levels from 0-100% of an arbitrary scale, the center seam is less than 0.2%. That's not too bad, though visible if you make a serious effort to show it.

    In contrast, look at the patches at the top and bottom of this (vertical orientation) CCD. They are much worse. A profile from this area (shown in the yellow box and graph) shows a dip of >0.5%. Has it bothered me in real-life images? No, but there is no specification for this type of thing and I wonder what it is. Showed this to Phase, who asked to get the camera for a look. They sent it back in much the same state so I don't think it bothers them much. Me neither, but I'd like to understand what is going on. The color patches Wayne sees are interesting, and I will look for them on mine.

    Peter
    Last edited by cunim; 2nd December 2013 at 10:43.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    876
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Don't get me wrong, I am very happy with my IQ180 and don't have much to complain, but I get that some people aren't to happy that a product that costs something around 30-40k shows any such faults even in more extreme editions. I just have to look at my 5D or Nikon, which I can push around at ISO 1600 without ANY such effects.

    However, I think this is just what MFDB are about. They aren't perfect, but as long as it works they are just amazing.


    NOW I just whish it would be possible, or should I say easy to map all this HUGE DR into one image in C1, this sadly isn't possible. Or not to the extend I would like. Note to Phase, take a look at Adobe, they !currently! do a better job when it comes to DR.

  17. #17
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    There is a specification for this. It's pretty simple. If it's meaningfully visible in normal photographic work with recommended lenses and current (3.0.1) firmware then it's not in spec. If it only shows up in a meaningful way when you apply crazy amounts of adjustment to the file then it's not in spec.

    Normal photographic work includes pretty strong adjustments (that's the whole point of a DB, they hold up under strong styling and adjustment). I do not mean "I'll adjust it until I see it" kinds of adjustment; the reason being ALL cameras will show terrible things if you look hard enough. For instance: take a 5D mark 2 file, shoot an LCC at low ISO, apply the LCC to itself (to even out any variation in color and brightness) and then auto-adjust the exposure (effectively stretching the histogram way out). You'll see some really awful things. Then breath, reset the adjustments and try to look for those issues in a normal file with normal adjustments - you won't see them.

    @Angy: the Schneider 35XL is not a "recommended lens" with the IQ180 (as you know). Especially with movements you may notice artifacts of this issue. The 35XL can still produce great images (including yours!), but such issues are possible with that lens. A Rodenstock 32HR or 40HR are better alternatives regarding interaction with the IQ180 sensor.

    @Christopher: Lightroom 4 is out and does great with harsh DR (as you note) but I think you'll be very pleased with C1 version 7 when it comes out :-). VERY pleased.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    There is a specification for this. It's pretty simple. If it's meaningfully visible in normal photographic work with recommended lenses and current (3.0.1) firmware then it's not in spec. If it only shows up in a meaningful way when you apply crazy amounts of adjustment to the file then it's not in spec.
    Doug, I would agree that if CCD defects are not visible in normal use, they don't matter. In fact, the things I am sensitive to tend to vanish when there is anything other than a uniform field of view and, as you say, all consumer cameras have flaws. End result, I'm happy with the IQ. It is good enough, even if the system does lose its custom settings.

    However, this topic relates to frustration from some who are concerned because of subtle defects in their expensive cameras. In that context, I take issue with the word "meaningful". To the sensitive amongst us, these defects are meaningful. Who decides? In the end, it is the individual user who must decide and Phase must help him or her to do that during the product selection process.

    That is where Phase and its dealers should be aggressive in tracking and collating reports of seams, blotches, etc. You already do it for color casts, for example. I hope that reports from an expanding user base will help you guide those users in what to expect from their equipment.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post

    @Christopher: Lightroom 4 is out and does great with harsh DR (as you note) but I think you'll be very pleased with C1 version 7 when it comes out :-). VERY pleased.
    C1 version7? Have you seen it already Doug???
    Curious to hear more about it!
    I am waiting desperately for LCC batch processing among other features.

  20. #20
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    [QUOTE=dougpeterson;402358]There is a specification for this. It's pretty simple. If it's meaningfully visible in normal photographic work with recommended lenses and current (3.0.1) firmware then it's not in spec. If it only shows up in a meaningful way when you apply crazy amounts of adjustment to the file then it's not in spec.

    For instance: take a 5D mark 2 file, shoot an LCC at low ISO, apply the LCC to itself (to even out any variation in color and brightness) and then auto-adjust the exposure (effectively stretching the histogram way out). You'll see some really awful things. Then breath, reset the adjustments and try to look for those issues in a normal file with normal adjustments - you won't see them.


    The major difference is obviously price, so I'm pretty sure the 5D owner is going to be less annoyed than the IQ180 owner. Also, chances are the IQ180, owner is going to print big, where artifacts may not be removed at the pixel level.

  21. #21
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    If either the 5d2 user or the 180 owner notice it in normal photographic work I would think they would be unhappy, and in either case their issue would be addresse by the manufacturer.

    I used the 5d2 because of its ubiquity and because it's well documented that I like canon and therefore I'm not just dumping on a brand. My point was that EVERY modern high res photographic device (Phase, Mamiya, Leaf, Hassy, Sinar, Canon, Nikon, Sony) can show this issue if pushed far enough. If an IQ180 owner is seeing it in normal photographic use then it's not in spec and requires attention. It's hard to tell without raw files (hard to tell what settings were used and how much the file has been adjusted).

    In fact, while we are on it, every film also showed tangentially related issues if you manipulated the end result hard enough. For example extremely minor uneven development would lead to slight variations of exposure which would manifest in a streaky manner - but only if you were scanning and pushing the curves around heavily.

    @cunim: Every time a customer starts a support case the raw files for the case are place on a server for Phase One to access. Especially interesting cases (e.g. Out of norm performance) one of the engineers from the relevant departments is consulted; often the head of that division. In this way field results are constantly fed back to the designers/engineers. There has been great improvement in the software and firmware in areas that stretch the abilities of the sensor because of just Hthat process. Take for instance the 35xl; at launch the lens was utterly unusable, but with the new LCC routine and improved firmware it is being comfortably used by many customers (with the understanding it simply will never work with large movements).

    So bottom line again: if you're seeing it in images in your normal workflow from supported lenses then your back is likely out of spec. If you're only seeing it when you adjust the file solely for the purpose of looking for it then you'd find issues with any camera. If you're at all unsure you can consult with your dealer: that's what they are there for!
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  22. #22
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Slightly OT but I totally have seen the 35xl on the 180 go from totally unusable to workable with the new tech analyze tool. Honestly even my new SK 28 Xl on my 160 would not be usable either without the new tech analyze tool. So in response to Wayne's issue if this is in normal mode of shooting than I think it needs a new calibration . I have not seen this myself.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    If either the 5d2 user or the 180 owner notice it in normal photographic work I would think they would be unhappy, and in either case their issue would be addresse by the manufacturer.

    @cunim: Every time a customer starts a support case the raw files for the case are place on a server for Phase One to access. Especially interesting cases (e.g. Out of norm performance) one of the engineers from the relevant departments is consulted; often the head of that division. In this way field results are constantly fed back to the designers/engineers. There has been great improvement in the software and firmware in areas that stretch the abilities of the sensor because of just Hthat process. Take for instance the 35xl; at launch the lens was utterly unusable, but with the new LCC routine and improved firmware it is being comfortably used by many customers (with the understanding it simply will never work with large movements).

    So bottom line again: if you're seeing it in images in your normal workflow from supported lenses then your back is likely out of spec. If you're only seeing it when you adjust the file solely for the purpose of looking for it then you'd find issues with any camera. If you're at all unsure you can consult with your dealer: that's what they are there for!
    OK Doug. I think we have an engineer and a photographer agreeing on a final outcome, even if they disagree on why.

    If I worry about seams, I would love to just ask my dealer for a definition of them. He doesn't have one. So, I capture a ganzfeld, correct it to even with LCC, and then plot the deviations. I get a clean cyclical variation of +-0.06% of a 64 bit theoretical dynamic range as we cross the edges of the seams. I get the same result with two IQ180 backs. Of course I would not see that and I doubt anyone else would either. However, if we window down to looking at a 12 bit slice of those 16 bits during processing the raw - not at all unlikely - the seams become something around 0.25% of the total intensity range seen in the image. In areas of even sky or in a corrected LCC blank, a skilled eye might well notice. I do. At least now I know why and I feel comfortable that the cameras I am working with are functioning about as well as they should.

    What, me worry?

  24. #24
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Just to update this, PhaseOne contacted me and after reviewing one of my raw files told me the back could definitely be improved by being re-calibrated, which is being arranged as we speak.

    I assume the problems were always there, just didn't exhibit themselves very often.
    wayne
    My gallery

  25. #25
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Great! Let us know what comes of your situation.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  26. #26
    petercoxphoto
    Guest

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Hi guys -
    Just to let you know that I'm working through the same problem (tiling in images) with Phase One on the IQ180 at the moment. I'm using mine on an Arca-Swiss Rm3d with a 23mm Rodenstock, and 35 and 47mm Schneiders.

    It's been in for recalibration once already and that didn't solve the problem. The current theory is that the problem may be lens related.

    As I don't make notes of what lens I use in a given shot, it can be tricky after the fact to see what lenses it occurs with, but I believe it may be limited to my 35mm Schneider. Anyone have any data on what lenses of theirs the problem appears with?

    Cheers,
    Peter

  27. #27
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    @Peter, your dealer should have helped guide you on lens selection for the IQ180. The 35XL will show this issue on any IQ180. As noted earlier in this thread it is not a recommended lens for use with an IQ180 (though that doesn't mean you can't use it to produce great images, just that you have to be aware of it's limitations).

    An optical center filter, and using less movement will reduce instances of issues with a 35XL (an optical center filter for your 23 and 47 are also good ideas depending on your usage of those lenses).

    TAshley (and others) might be able to chime in additional real world advice based on his experience with the same combination.

    See Also: http://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Ar...1&languageid=1
    (not updated for the IQ180, but relevant relative to a P65+).
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  28. #28
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    *chime*

    The 35XL on IQ180 is certainly not for the faint hearted and I would never buy one, unless it was a real bargain because everyone else was dumping them... However, given that I know the lens inside out, love its freedom from distortion and its great sharpness, and given that I already owned one and didn't want to pony up (an english phrase meaning 'to pay') for the best alternative, the Rodie 32, I delved.

    My delving into SK35XL/IQ180 sort of delivered:

    You have to use a centre filter. You have to give up hope of stitching without tears. You have to turn off Light Falloff in Analyse Technical Wide Angle LCC. You have to get the exposure really really right AND your LCC file has to be specific for every shot and has to be perfectly exposed.

    And you can't shift left or right more than a tiny amount. You can do 5 rise, maybe 10 if you're lucky.

    If you ignore any combination of the above and find yourself in Radical PP land to correct your errors, you will sometimes see tiles emerge, and then you are screwed unless you are Jeff Schewe.

    It's like Dr Johnson said in this famous (mis)quote:

    "Sir, a 35XL on an IQ180 is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

    Actually it's not too bad. You can often make the dog sprint.


    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    @Peter, your dealer should have helped guide you on lens selection for the IQ180. The 35XL will show this issue on any IQ180. As noted earlier in this thread it is not a recommended lens for use with an IQ180 (though that doesn't mean you can't use it to produce great images, just that you have to be aware of it's limitations).

    An optical center filter, and using less movement will reduce instances of issues with a 35XL (an optical center filter for your 23 and 47 are also good ideas depending on your usage of those lenses).

    TAshley (and others) might be able to chime in additional real world advice based on his experience with the same combination.

    See Also: Camera systems and image software
    (not updated for the IQ180, but relevant relative to a P65+).

  29. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    I just sent my IQ180 back to Phase today because of tiling issues. So, just to let you know, you aren't the only one. This is my first digital MF back so I didn't really know what to expect but on some of my latest shots, the tiling was definetly noticeable on 100% in Capture One. Thank goodness for warranties!

  30. #30
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: IQ180 frustrations.

    Mine should be in Denmark by now ... I'm hoping it returns soon, gonna miss the tulips in downtown SLC ...
    wayne
    My gallery

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •