BasICColor DISCUS Owners thread - Page 4 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 31Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 08:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlinsley View Post
Tim, if you need specifics these are what I use with the Discus and i1pro2 (non-referral links to Amazon):
Amazon 7 port 4A hub
Tripp Lite 36ft USB2 extender
If you put the powered hub *after* the passive extension and make sure the power can deliver at least 500mA per port, you don't need an active extension. I use an Amazon basics extension before the hub and it works fine (although the i1pro2 will not pass some reflectance tests that way, but they are not needed for front projector calibration AFAIK and I have no issues in my calibration sessions).

At least 2A for 4 ports and 4A for 8 ports is what you need, as long as you don't do anything silly (for example putting a lot of non-powered hard drives in the same hub as the meters).

Personally I don't plug anything but the three meters in my 4-port powered USB 2.0 hub, and I don't use more than two meters at the same time.

If you can, it's always better to move the laptop/computer and use one of the computer's ports without any extension.

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro

Last edited by Manni01; 03-26-2020 at 09:18 AM.
Manni01 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 09:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Light Illusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 874 Post(s)
Liked: 1355
Please note that the laser pointer in the Discus is offset from the centre of the measurement spot, with a parallax offset of something like 3cm.

And when comparing FOV spot sizes the manufacturer data is 'generic', as all probes have 'soft' edges to the measurement spot.

The only way to really 'verify' spot size (and position) is to use slow (manual) wipe of a wide white stripe on black.
As soon as the white stripe enters the spot measurement area the probe reading will start to increase above 'black'.
That process will have to be performed for left/right/top/bottom.

Obviously, the 'reading speed' of the probe will define the speed at which the white stripe can be moved.

Steve

Steve Shaw
LIGHT ILLUSION

Light Illusion is offline  
post #93 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 10:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post
Please note that the laser pointer in the Discus is offset from the centre of the measurement spot, with a parallax offset of something like 3cm.

And when comparing FOV spot sizes the manufacturer data is 'generic', as all probes have 'soft' edges to the measurement spot.

The only way to really 'verify' spot size (and position) is to use slow (manual) wipe of a wide white stripe on black.
As soon as the white stripe enters the spot measurement area the probe reading will start to increase above 'black'.
That process will have to be performed for left/right/top/bottom.

Obviously, the 'reading speed' of the probe will define the speed at which the white stripe can be moved.

Steve
Yes, we know all that, the 3cm off centre is even mentioned in Daryll's document. We're not sending a rocket to the moon, we're measuring patterns for a home-cinema set-up.

It's just that the data used by myself and others for years without issues was questioned by some.

You have provided useful data for the Discus, but without comparable data for the i1pro2 it doesn't really help, as we don't know exactly what you are measuring.

The whole point of Darryl's table was to provide data that was comparable, precisely because in most cases the manufacturers' data isn't.

I haven't experienced any issues following Darryl's measurements, training a Discus to an i1pro2 with half a dozen JVC projectors over close to a decade.

So until a reliable source (you would be one) provides an alternate set of data for at least the two meters discussed here (Discus and i1pro2), there is no way to compare.

I have zero motivation to take any of these measurements, given that I get excellent results with the values I have already suggested (2ft for i1pro2, 1ft for Discus or 3ft for i1pro2 and 2ft for Discus, or both Discus and i1pro2 at the same distance, provided the pattern is large enough, which should be the case with the meters at 1-2 ft, aimed the way I suggested, with 100% size patterns). Here, all of these provide repeatable, accurate results.

So if you can't provide the other half of the information, there is no point in questioning the data already available, or the methodology.

The day an alternate set of values is published, I'll happily compare results.

In the meantime, I'll keep doing what I've done for many, many years

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro

Last edited by Manni01; 03-26-2020 at 10:11 AM.
Manni01 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #94 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 10:40 AM
Member
 
TimHamburg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 25
These are some profiling results I got with Ted's workflow.
Are those offsets in the norm for a Discus.

I come from an i1D3 and they were not so big.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (14).png
Views:	70
Size:	788.9 KB
ID:	2701920  
TimHamburg is offline  
post #95 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 10:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
As I said, set 100% white to D65 with the i1pro2 (within 1 dE 20000), make your profile following my advice including settings for each meters, then look at what you get with the Discus when the profile is applied. I use the white balance layout for this because it gives you peak white and RGB balance at 100%.

The brightness should be more or less identical, and the dE should be the same (under 1 dE 2000).

It's normal to have large corrections in the profiles because the Discus is significantly off in its default mode, but you should get the same readings from the profiled Discus at 100% stim as with the i1pro2.

If you get a large difference at 100% white, something is wrong in your profiles or methodology.

If you can't get 100% white to read properly, there is no point taking gamut readings, they will be wrong.

Only proceed with further measurements when you've got the first step right.

Of course I'm talking about profiles for your JVC. I have no idea about what you have to do for your OLED.

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro

Last edited by Manni01; 03-26-2020 at 11:22 AM.
Manni01 is offline  
post #96 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 11:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post
@ 50cm = 8cm

With an aperture angle of 4.5 deg.
8 cm is in line with Darrell Bird’s numbers, but that would not correspond to 4.5 deg.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #97 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 11:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
8 cm is in line with Darrell Bird’s numbers, but that would not correspond to 4.5 deg.
I thought so myself initially, but unless I'm mistaken Darryl's numbers are in inches and Steve's numbers are in cms. The relative size is in line, but not the absolute values.

This is why I asked Steve to confirm what he was measuring (FWHM? TLT? Something else?) and to provide measurements of the same data for at least the i1pro2.

Otherwise his numbers are useless: Manufacturers' measurements can't be compared directly as often they don't measure the same thing.

We need, like Daryll did, measurements of the same data, in the same units, for at least two different meters (minimum Discus and i1pro2).

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro

Last edited by Manni01; 03-26-2020 at 11:23 AM.
Manni01 is offline  
post #98 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 12:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post
I thought so myself initially, but unless I'm mistaken Darryl's numbers are in inches and Steve's numbers are in cms. The relative size is in line, but not the absolute values.
At 50 cm distance Darrell’s number would be about 9 cm (by interpolation), vs 8 cm from Steve.

However, Darrell quoted 11 deg, which is consistent with the diameters. Steve quoted 4.5 deg (unless that’s half the total angle).

Last edited by Dominic Chan; 03-26-2020 at 01:38 PM.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #99 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
At 50 cm distance Darrell’s number would be about 9 cm (by interpolation), vs 8 cm from Steve.

However, Darrell quoted 11 deg, which is consistent with the diameters. Steve quoted 4.5 deg.
Until we get two sets of data for two meters done with the same methodology, any data is pointless.

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro
Manni01 is offline  
post #100 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 01:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post
Until we get two sets of data for two meters done with the same methodology, any data is pointless.
i1Pro aperture (and presumably i1Pro2) has a plateau shape fall-off whereas the Discus has a Gaussian fall-off, so I don’t know what would be considered “done with the same methodology”. Darrell’s figures are probably as good as any.

In any case, unless the projector is super non-uniform I don’t see how it would matter. And if the projector is that non-uniform, having only a few inches in the centre calibrated to 100.00% accuracy doesn’t mean much when looking at the whole picture.

Last edited by Dominic Chan; 03-26-2020 at 01:45 PM.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #101 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 02:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
i1Pro aperture (and presumably i1Pro2) has a plateau shape fall-off whereas the Discus has a Gaussian fall-off, so I don’t know what would be considered “done with the same methodology”. Darrell’s figures are probably as good as any.

In any case, unless the projector is super non-uniform I don’t see how it would matter. And if the projector is that non-uniform, having only a few inches in the centre calibrated to 100.00% accuracy doesn’t mean much when looking at the whole picture.
This is what I've been saying all along.

I'm happy with Darryl's table, but some here are questioning its validity.

All I'm saying is that if anyone is questioning Darryl's work, it's pointless to post one set of data about one meter.

Either they do what Daryll has done, if they think you can do better, and they specify what they believe they are measuring (Daryll said TLT and FWHM), and they do it for at least two meters, preferably those discussed here (Discus and i1pro2) to keep the discussion on topic, or they stop wasting their time (and ours) by posting fragmented information.

Posting just one set of data about one meter (the Discus) without stating what is supposed to be measured, and not measuring the same data with at least another meter doesn't help one bit.

Either we have two sets of spot sizes at a series of distances for at least two meters, or we have nothing.

I have also said that at least for my RS2000, it doesn't seem to matter, I am now using both meters at the same distance without any problem (with full screen patterns), but this is a thread about the Discus, so it might be relevant for other users who have different displays/projectors, and might need for display stability reasons to use smaller patterns or whatever.

Anyway, until a reliable source such as Steve does their homework if they have a problem with Darryl's table and offer an alternative but meaningful and usable set of data that can be field-tested, I'll keep using Darryl's table.

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro

Last edited by Manni01; 03-26-2020 at 02:03 PM.
Manni01 is offline  
post #102 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 02:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post
This is what I've been saying all along.

I'm happy with Darryl's table, but some here are questioning its validity.
I understand that. I was just saying Steve’s number is also in line with Darrell’s, and both being very different from the number quoted for the “spec”.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #103 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 02:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
I understand that. I was just saying Steve’s number is also in line with Darrell’s, and both being very different from the number quoted for the “spec”.
Yes, and how does that help from a practical point of view, apart from the fact that Steve, unlike others taking issue with Darryl's table, isn't an unknown amateur but a reputable source of information?

Darryl made that table to precisely to get around the inconsistency of the data provided by the various manufacturers: angles, distances, curve, etc.

If the same (competent) person takes a meter, measure its FOV at different distances, and does the same for other meters, then we have a usable set of data, that has some value in the field to match the FOV of two meters.

If someone thinks there is something wrong with Darryl's data, they have to do the same, instead of posting fragmented data or the methodology they suggest to obtain such data.

Anyway, I'm out. Feel free to keep discussing a single set of data with whoever you enjoy spending that time with .

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro
Manni01 is offline  
post #104 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 02:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Light Illusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 874 Post(s)
Liked: 1355
Have heard back from the Discus manufacturer - they confirm the data I posted.
But also stated that due to the lack of a defined spot edges, the values are 'within tolerances'.
Their suggestion is to use the same 'white bar' approach outlined earlier.

Steve

Steve Shaw
LIGHT ILLUSION

Light Illusion is offline  
post #105 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 02:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
Anger.miki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 827
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post
I have requested confirmation from the manufacturer.
Could you ask also to x-rite if they have measured FOV at different distance? Thanks.

Steve, aren't you happy that you are a trusted source even for Manni now?

Anyway, matching small FOV at 1 foot is practically useless, unless you have super crap uniformity panel/PJ, the more you "cover" of the screen/pattern the better. In that case, you really need to match FOV.

The Unknown Amateur.

T.U.C. Master | TVs: Pioneer PDP-LX5090H, LG OLED55C8PLA | AV Receiver: Pioneer VSX-921 | BD Player: Panasonic DMP-BDT260EG | External LUT box: Entertainment Experience eeColor | Softwares: Light Illusion Lightspace HTP, CM Enthusiast, HCFR, DisplayCAL | Probes: Klein K10-A, Jeti spectraval 1501, X-Rite i1 Display Pro OEM Rev. B-02 | Test Pattern Generator: Riccardo Biasiotto’s PGenerator (RPi)
Anger.miki is online now  
post #106 of 112 Old 03-26-2020, 04:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
gwgill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 384 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post
If the same (competent) person takes a meter, measure its FOV at different distances, and does the same for other meters, then we have a usable set of data, that has some value in the field to match the FOV of two meters.
Really, the obsession with FOV's is rather puzzling. The meters aren't sensitive to the area of screen they view. They measure Luminance, which is cd/m^2. So the measurement itself accounts for the area viewed.

So as long as the meter average a largish number of pixels, and as long as your display isn't so non-uniform as to make the measurement un-representative of the overall screen behavior, and as long as stray light and reflections aren't messing with the measurements (contact measurement has advantages here!), the distance from the display is irrelevant.
Dominic Chan, bobof and Anger.miki like this.

Author of ArgyllCMS and ArgyllPRO ColorMeter
gwgill is offline  
post #107 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 02:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,540
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5779 Post(s)
Liked: 6237
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwgill View Post
Really, the obsession with FOV's is rather puzzling. The meters aren't sensitive to the area of screen they view. They measure Luminance, which is cd/m^2. So the measurement itself accounts for the area viewed.

So as long as the meter average a largish number of pixels, and as long as your display isn't so non-uniform as to make the measurement un-representative of the overall screen behavior, and as long as stray light and reflections aren't messing with the measurements (contact measurement has advantages here!), the distance from the display is irrelevant.
The obsession with matching FOV comes from people who have an agenda in this thread.

I only mentioned a document that is useful if you want to match FOV, saying that it’s been used in the past.

I have said many times that I am not matching FOV anymore and currently use both meters at the same distance, and that with my JVC and my pattern size it seems to be working absolutely fine.

I certainly don’t see a reason to match FOV on a JVC projector if you are using full patterns and are measuring the centre of the screen from 1-2 feet, but the OP was talking about using 10% patterns, so if for some reason he wanted to keep doing that, FOV seems a lot more relevant than with the full patterns he is using now.

For me the main reason I used to think about FOV is that if, for some reason, due to display technology, you have to use small patterns and can’t be close enough to be absolutely sure that you are not measuring some black around the pattern as well, because that’s not desirable.

I know the JVCs well enough, but I don’t have any experience with other technology, so I was erring on the side of caution.

For some reason, some here seem intent on making a mountain out of a molehill, make it sound like FOV has to be scientifically calculated, or is related to uniformity.

Anyway, I’m tired of repeating this, there are lot of knowledgeable people here to help the OP, so hasta la vista, babies!

Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
JVC Macro feature on Vertex/Vertex2/Integral2/Maestro
Manni01 is offline  
post #108 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 02:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Light Illusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 874 Post(s)
Liked: 1355
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwgill View Post
Really, the obsession with FOV's is rather puzzling. The meters aren't sensitive to the area of screen they view. They measure Luminance, which is cd/m^2. So the measurement itself accounts for the area viewed.

So as long as the meter average a largish number of pixels, and as long as your display isn't so non-uniform as to make the measurement un-representative of the overall screen behavior, and as long as stray light and reflections aren't messing with the measurements (contact measurement has advantages here!), the distance from the display is irrelevant.
The key here is the phrase "as long as your display isn't so non-uniform..."
That is where the goal of FOV matching comes from.
I had assumed that was well understood.

Steve
Anger.miki likes this.

Steve Shaw
LIGHT ILLUSION

Light Illusion is offline  
post #109 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 05:03 AM - Thread Starter
aka jfinnie
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Norwich, UK
Posts: 3,961
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3192 Post(s)
Liked: 2328
Devils advocate; if your display is so non-uniform as to have a big effect on probe matching, what's the point in calibrating it? Your calibration is only valid for the 3 inch circle you matched your probe to. Best junk the display...

I think there is probably more value in matching the angle of incidence that the probe makes to the screen (and the screen to the viewer's gaze) than anything else.
bobof is offline  
post #110 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 05:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobof View Post
Devils advocate; if your display is so non-uniform as to have a big effect on probe matching, what's the point in calibrating it? Your calibration is only valid for the 3 inch circle you matched your probe to. Best junk the display...
I have a feature request for the next generation calibration - support 5DLUT, the additional 2D being the width and height of the display
bobof likes this.
Dominic Chan is offline  
post #111 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 05:40 AM - Thread Starter
aka jfinnie
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Norwich, UK
Posts: 3,961
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3192 Post(s)
Liked: 2328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic Chan View Post
I have a feature request for the next generation calibration - support 5DLUT, the additional 2D being the width and height of the display
It's not as crazy as you think.

My old Sanyo projector (PLV-Z800) had in the service tools; 21x14 x 8 grey levels xRGB channels uniformity correction system to remove colour shading issues on the screen. I used to edit it by hand to tweak uniformity issues that had come in over time. Some of the Epson projectors now actually expose user controls for this, allowing you to set the direction of the shading and adjustment level.

I think JVC do such a good job on their optics that they don't need much if any of this - I've had 4 JVC projectors and they've basically been as close to bang on for uniformity as anyone could ever hope.
bobof is offline  
post #112 of 112 Old 03-27-2020, 05:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Posts: 8,083
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5797 Post(s)
Liked: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobof View Post
Some of the Epson projectors now actually expose user controls for this, allowing you to set the direction of the shading and adjustment level.

I think JVC do such a good job on their optics that they don't need much if any of this - I've had 4 JVC projectors and they've basically been as close to bang on for uniformity as anyone could ever hope.
The strange thing is that the Epson projectors do not provide independent R/G/B controls for the 10-point gamma calibration. And they sure aren't bang on.
Dominic Chan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Display Calibration

Tags
basiccolor , calibration , colorimeter , discus , meter

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off