Jump to content

Pimax 8k / 5k VR headsets coming to Kickstarter this month!


Bullets
 Share

Recommended Posts

According to Varjo the very center of our eyes see 100 pixels per degree in the center portion eye, pimax only sees 20 per degree, only 1 pixel per degree at the edges. Its still a world of difference from Gen 1 sets though. Can't wait for gen3.

Edited by TunaEatsLion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I changed my mind due to lower gpu needs than what I have been expecting, I pledged a 8K too.

 

The other HMDs I was keeping an eye on to upgrade from my current rift cv1 were the samsung and the LG.

 

My main concern with the samsung was weight, if specs are right it is noticeably heavier than a rift cv1 (which is already heavy enough to make me feel neck pain after long sessions due to constantly looking around to spot targets and threats). On top of that firsts reports from WMR HMDs owners report a bit shaky headtracking (which could be a pain for aiming).

 

And the LG still has no revealed definitive specs nor release date.

 

So yes I guess the pimax 8K may currently be the best gamble to make a step forward when you own a 1st gen HMD and don't want to wait for too long.

Edited by neelrocker
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

I don’t have the technical knowledge of most people posting here about VR issues. As a result I have to view the PIMAX 8K differently and any decision comes more from the gut than the brain. I have been a VR fan for a long time, even did KS for OR and had high hopes until they sold to FB. I am tired of sitting on the sidelines waiting for the perfect VR, just not going to happen. My options are to continue to wade through all the detailed technical minutia and wait or to start experiencing VR. I choose the latter. Maybe my rig will run it, maybe it won’t. If it won’t, there will be options.

 

My thoughts:

FOV: Much wider than Vive/OR. This to me a priority for immersion, less goggle effect.

Brightness: Brightness and blacks on par with Vive/OR. Don’t hear a lot of complaints about this.

Resolution: Much higher than Vive/OR. Another major issue I have been waiting for.

SDE: Numbers are one thing however most that have tried it seem to say although there is some SDE it is less than Vive/OR and it is not noticed once immersed in the game.

Objects at distance: My biggest concern for mp. This unit is considered to be much better by reviewer. Is it good enough for IL-2? Some with Vive/OR say their units already are, others say it isn’t. With the higher res and less SDE I am hoping for the best.

Frame rate: Although not 90, the lower rate didn’t seem to be noticeable to reviewer or negatively affect his experience. I know IL-2 can be a more strenuous application.

Tracking: With the Lighthouse accurate 6DoF is available without lag.

God rays: Not apparent to reviewer. Another concern of mine, it appears this has been addressed.

Weight: Supposedly lighter than Vive and close to OR.

 

The majority of individuals interviewed in reviews said the PIMAX 8K was a much better experience than the Vive or OR. I don’t think there is too much debate about this. The question is, how will it match up against the next generation of Vive or OR. Part of the problem is they aren’t near releasing their products. When will they become available, December 2018? Will they be designed for IL-2 type sims or less strenuous arcade type games?

 

Thanks to everyone that has posted their insights and analysis not only on the PIMAX 8K but VR as a whole. I hope things work out and I can join the VR skies with an aircraft that I am sitting in versus one sitting in front of me.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@@VBF-12_Stick-95

Other advantages: larger sweet spot, support for corrective lenses, being part of the open SteamVR ecosystem.

 

Regarding the last point, Oculus has delivered some high quality stuff, but for accessories, I'm tied to whatever Facebook is willing to provide me. With SteamVR, all companies are free to try and build new stuff. In the long term that's where innovation will happen.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ neelrocker and @a_radek.

 

Loved reading your discussions and the images, very informative thanks.  As VBF-Stick-95 pointed (and you are no doubt aware) it's not just about the resolution increase.  Even if it is only 25% that is still fairly significant because the reduced SDE and increased FOV will make the final result noticeably better than Rift/Vive.

 

Don't forget God rays which are a very large issue on CV1.

 

I ma backer number 966 for a Pimax 8K and I am honestly expecting the January delivery target will slip by a few months.  Anything before that will be a bonus.

Edited by ICDP
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact if a game run with a 1.7 SS (rift SS, not steamVR) it will indeed run the same (framerate) on the pimax with SS 1.

 

This is true taking two assumptions:

1.- Pimax uses same internal SS than rift to correct lens-warp

2.- Pimax uses same freq for render than Rift (90Hz)

 

So, based in these two premises we can build the following table:

post-18865-0-90590600-1509789840_thumb.jpg

Currently a 1070 card manage well a SteamVR SS of 1.7 with BOS VR test, but it will not be power enough to run Pimax 5K/8K with SS=1. (I will need to think upgrade my card for black friday!)

Also, a 1080Ti card manage well a SteamVR SS of 2.9 (1.7 in OTT) with BOS VR test (according to Panthercules tests). So, It would be fine to run Pimax 5K/8K.

 

The Pimax 8K X is out of range for current GPUs. Pimax 8K X will need SLI, or Foveating render, or next gen GPUs.

 

I hope theory will confirm experience, let´s wait for Jan-18 (or better March...)

Edited by chiliwili69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I don’t have the technical knowledge of most people posting here about VR issues. As a result I have to view the PIMAX 8K differently and any decision comes more from the gut than the brain. I have been a VR fan for a long time, even did KS for OR and had high hopes until they sold to FB. I am tired of sitting on the sidelines waiting for the perfect VR, just not going to happen. My options are to continue to wade through all the detailed technical minutia and wait or to start experiencing VR. I choose the latter. Maybe my rig will run it, maybe it won’t. If it won’t, there will be options.   My thoughts: FOV: Much wider than Vive/OR. This to me a priority for immersion, less goggle effect. Brightness: Brightness and blacks on par with Vive/OR. Don’t hear a lot of complaints about this. Resolution: Much higher than Vive/OR. Another major issue I have been waiting for.

 

I think you will not regret. It was also a bit gut decision for me.

 

Regarding resolution, I don´t expect a more detailed views due to resolution, but more clearer view due to less SDE.

Remember that this increased resolution is spread along this wider FOV, so the important thing is the pixel per degree, not the pixel density of the panel.

I don´t know how the lens transform the image and how it is warp in the display, but a basic calculation of horizontal pixel divided by FOV can give you a hint:

 

Rift/Vive:  1080/100 = 10.8 pixel/degree

Pimax 5K&8K: 2560/200 = 12.8 pixel/degree

 

So, the increased detail will not be spectacular, by FOV and clarity will be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Nice read. It confirms what we saw in OC4. The High-end PC users are not a priority for Oculus (That´s really a pity since the PC was a priority for Oculus before Facebook acquisition).

So, yes Facebook brought the money to Oculus, but now this money went just to make more money, which is fair but not with my money.

 

Regarding HTC I don´t know. They were very silent before they launched the Vive in Feb-2016. Maybe they will surprise us with something new in spring-2019...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's true that the input resolution is "only" 1440p, the panel resolution is still 2160p. Depending on how the upscaler works, the aliasing artifacts that we will see might be those of a 2160p panel, not 1440p. It should improve visual quality significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice read. It confirms what we saw in OC4. The High-end PC users are not a priority for Oculus (That´s really a pity since the PC was a priority for Oculus before Facebook acquisition).

So, yes Facebook brought the money to Oculus, but now this money went just to make more money, which is fair but not with my money.

 

Regarding HTC I don´t know. They were very silent before they launched the Vive in Feb-2016. Maybe they will surprise us with something new in spring-2019...

 

I don't think Oculus have abandoned high end PC users, they are just keeping quiet on it as well while they increase their footprint in the lower end systems to gain more market share. 

 

We know some things they have already talked about in the past, regarding a CV2. Plus purchasing an eye tracking company as well, along with pumping a ton of money into VR software development for us high end users to run.  And they have always talked about a 2019 time frame for their next generation high end device. 

 

I could well be proven wrong, but I am not too concerned about the future of Oculus high end VR business. Although seeing all this success with the Pimax Kickstarter makes me wonder why they are staying so quiet on it, it would be nice to get an update from Oculus on their roadmap for this end of the business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Oculus have abandoned high end PC users

 

I didn´t say they abandoned the High-End PC users, but according to OC4 nothing for PC was announced. In two years time! (this is a lot in VR market).

The progress they showed with DK1, DK2 and CV1 is somehow interrupted by going to the masses (ie no High-end users).

 

I am sure Oculus is technically able to just provide a version 2 Rift with just 140FOV and same res than Pimax 5K o 8K. The fact is that they don´t want to do it yet since this will require to people to buy GPUs of 800$, so only a very small market will afford that.

 

The rift is quite OK to play most of the games offered by the Oculus store, and this is where Oculus want to go, to the 1 Billion users. Apparently no flight simmers among them.

 

I don´t think Oculus is silent intentionally, otherwise they would not talk about SantaCruz or other future non-PC devices. I think they didn´t talk about that in OC4 because they simply has nothing in the 12months horizon to release for PC. If they had it, they had announced in OC4, just to show they are in the leading edge. But no, the new leading edge in high-end PC is Pimax.

 

They need to sell more current Rifts, exploit current games, wait for better GPUs, and do more research for new technologies, but this doesn´t prevent them from just releasing a high-end rift with wider FOV or just only more resolution.In one side I really like Oculus for pioneer this VR revolution in the past 4 years, but on the other side I am really frustrated by how they totally ignored the high-end PC users (including flight-sim, space-sim, car-racing, etc) in the last OC4. I wanted to be there to just ask them, "What about us??!!"

 

Small companies like Pimax could have a sustained market share (very small comparing with Oculus) but specialised in high-end PCs.

 

Regarding HTC, in Nov 14th they will unveil their standalone VR device which is along the line of the Oculus Go/Santa-Cruz. Since HTC is less interested in the social aspect of VR (I don´t use social stuff neither in real or virtual life) they might be interested more in the PC users and they might release something sooner.

Edited by chiliwili69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

Chiliwili69, I think you are using vertical vs horizontal pixels counts.  Shouldn't it be the following? (EDIT: Sorry Chili, you were correct for horizontal count,  I had my Vive/OR numbers backward, fixed below)

 

Vive/OR:  1080 / 110 = 9.8 ppd  (EDITED)

PIMAX 8K: 3840 / 200 = 19.2 ppd, a 95.9% increase

 

EDIT NOTE:  Although upscaled from 2560 to 3840, 3840 is native to the panel.
 

Vertical pixel counts are going from 1200 to 2160, an 80% increase (although this is 1440 upscaled to 2160).

 

Here are some other things I thought about.

 

Overall pixel count:

Vive/Or:  1080 X 1200 = 1.296 million

PIMAX 8K:  3840 X 2160 = 8.2944 million

 

Overall pixel counts however are misleading as the aspect ratios are different as well as the physical panel size.  I don't know the panel sizes so I can't get ppi.  Just looking at aspect ratio you get the following.

 

Aspect ratio calc:

Vive/OR:  1200 / 1080 = 1.111 (a 10:9 aspect)

PIMAX 8K:  3840 / 2160 = 1.778 (a 16:9 aspect)

 

Overall pixels/aspect ratio:

Vive/OR = 1.17 million

PIMAX 8K = 4.67 million, a 300% increase.

 

The way I see it there should be a significant increase over existing VR.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you will not regret. It was also a bit gut decision for me.

 

Regarding resolution, I don´t expect a more detailed views due to resolution, but more clearer view due to less SDE.

Remember that this increased resolution is spread along this wider FOV, so the important thing is the pixel per degree, not the pixel density of the panel.

I don´t know how the lens transform the image and how it is warp in the display, but a basic calculation of horizontal pixel divided by FOV can give you a hint:

 

Rift/Vive:  1080/100 = 10.8 pixel/degree

Pimax 5K&8K: 2560/200 = 12.8 pixel/degree

 

So, the increased detail will not be spectacular, by FOV and clarity will be nice.

 

Just to correct your maths, the FOV of Rift/Vive is 110.  So 1080/110 = 9.8 pixel/degree, or about 30% higher PPD for Pimax 5K and 8K.  The 8K also gets up scaled to 3840x2160 reducing pixilation even further.

Edited by ICDP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

ICDP, I don't understand why you are using vertical pixel count divided by horizontal FOV.  See my post above.  EDIT: Now I understand, you know what you are doing and I don't.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

Thinking about it (probably already been computed) but the only way you get to 110 or 200 degrees horizontal FOV is using both eyes.  I wonder if the calculation below is a more accurate comparison of horizontal FOV pixel per degree.

 

Vive/OR:   1080 X 2 / 110 =  21.6 ppd (EDIT)
PIMAX 8K: 3840 X 2 / 200 =  38.4 ppd

 

This shows a 78% increase.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the very beginning I have been expecting VR market would grow the same way ffb wheels market did:

 

Very slow adoption at the beginning, then when adoption begins to get larger market is overwhelmed with low-end to mid-range products and smaller companies begin to develop high-end solutions aiming at the most enthusiast customers (who are a minority, even though this part of the market increases over time, but it takes many years).

Edited by neelrocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

Chili, ICDP, sorry guys, I was off, fixed my calcs above.  Whether they are right or not is another thing.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about it (probably already been computed) but the only way you get to 110 or 200 degrees horizontal FOV is using both eyes. I wonder if the calculation below is a more accurate comparison of horizontal FOV pixel per degree.

 

Vive/OR: 1080 X 2 / 110 = 21.6 ppd (EDIT)

PIMAX 8K: 3840 X 2 / 200 = 38.4 ppd

 

This shows a 78% increase.

This is from FAQ on pimax kickstarter page:

 

For Pimax 8K, currently, we've utilized 80% of the display panel. At the same time we are trying to optimize the optical design to use the entire panel. The monocular horizontal FOV is no less than 150 degrees. so currently the PPD= 3840*0.8/150=20.48(we have published an algorithm that eliminated the binocular overlap)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about it (probably already been computed) but the only way you get to 110 or 200 degrees horizontal FOV is using both eyes.  I wonder if the calculation below is a more accurate comparison of horizontal FOV pixel per degree.

 

Normally when VR HMD calculates FOV they refer to horizontal FOV for one eye. 

Theoretically VR FOV for one eye can not be higher than 180 for flat panels.

 

But this should not be the case for Pimax, since it uses two panels which are not in the same plane. They are rotated. The picture 2 here show this well:

 

http://doc-ok.org/?p=1649#more-1649

 

So, to properly calculate the rendered Pixel Per Degree (PPD) of the Pimax an Rift we should write:

 

Rift:  1080/100= 10.8  (Oculus might claim it is 110 but it is more 95-100 rather than 110).

Rift: 1080/84= 12.8 (47º+37=84º is the horizontal FOV in one eye in CV1, http://doc-ok.org/?p=1414)

Pimax 5K&8K : 2560/140= 18.3  (Pimax 8K use the same rendered resolution than 5K)

 

So, yes, we should expect a nice boost in both, detail and clarity. We are a bit closer to the human resolution of 60 pixel/degree.

In any case, this is just a basic indication which doesn´t really take into account the lens distortion and image warp.

 

The 200FOV is a kind of marketing since it refers to both eyes, and the percieved FOV (by people who try it) is not the double of the rift, more like 180.

Edited by chiliwili69
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

EDIT NOTE:  Although upscaled from 2560 to 3840, 3840 is native to the panel.

 

The important number is not the native panel (for SDE yes but for detail not), but the true resolution used for the render. So we should use 2560. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is easier to count ppd using vertical FOV.

Pimax 120 degree vertical - 2160/120= 18

Oculus 90 degree vertical - 1200/90= 13.3

 

This is rough calculation of PPD for displays without considering effectiveness of lenses that were used.

 

Using vertical FOV we can avoid considering how much overlap for binocular vision each headset is using. From reviews I understand that pimax has a wider "sweet spot" wich might mean there is more overlap, but we do not really know that.

Edited by Balapan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rift: 1080/100= 10.8 (Oculus might claim it is 110 but it is more 95-100 rather than 110).

 

I think the horizontal FOV for the Rift is about 80 degrees, see http://doc-ok.org/?p=1414. This gives 13.5 pixels/degree

 

By the way, I did a comparison of an image downscaled to 10 pixels, and an image downscaled to 13 and then upscaled to 20 pixels. All up and down-scaling was down using cubic interpolation.

If the upscaler in the Pimax 8k uses cubic interpolation, then that should give an idea of image quality of Pimax' 1440p-upscaled-to-2160p vs Rift CV1

 

post-31381-0-52132400-1509820901.png

 

Enlarged:

 

post-31381-0-94841900-1509821051.png

Edited by coconut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

Chiliwili69:


So, to properly calculate the rendered Pixel Per Degree (PPD) of the Pimax an Rift we should write:

 

Rift:  1080/100= 10.8  (Oculus might claim it is 110 but it is more 95-100 rather than 110).

Pimax 5K&8K : 2560/140= 18.3  (Pimax 8K use the same rendered resolution than 5K)

 

Thanks, that is still a very impressive 69% increase.

 

The important number is not the native panel (for SDE yes but for detail not), but the true resolution used for the render. So we should use 2560. 

 

Thanks again.  If I understand this properly (no guarantee there) the output from the card will be at 1440 X 2560 (same as my current monitor).  The PIMAX 8K will upscale this to 2160 X 3840 (unlike the 5K which will only show the res at the input level).  Based on: 

 

 

For input signals that less than 8K, e.g. 4K, Pimax 8K can upscale 4K signals to 8K resolution with a special video processing module in the headset.

 

I assume doing this will place less "stress" on the GPU allowing a higher fps.  At the same time you will see a higher resolution picture, though maybe not the same as a true 4K input might render.  Obviously whether this works or not is dependent on the graphics card's capability.

 

They also talk about using Brainwarp where one panel renders at a time.  Will this also help lessen stress on the GPU?

 

I'm interested to see just how well my 1070 can handle it considering the above.  There are tweaks within the game I can probably use.   I don't need it to make my eyes bleed but we'll see.  If my poor 1070 doesn't pan out, my Plan B is a 1080ti.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Pimax 120 degree vertical - 2160/120= 18

 

But the real rendered pixels for Pimax5K&8K are 1440 for vertical, so:

 

1440/120= 12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the horizontal FOV for the Rift is about 80 degrees, see http://doc-ok.org/?p=1414.

 

Nice analysis. I confirms the  better FOV of DK1 & DK2 over the CV1.

 

But the looking at the tests, the horizontal FOV for one eye of the CV1 is 47º (max). So the calculation should be:

 

1080/47= 23 which is more than the Pimax 5K&8K!

1080/84=12.8

Edited by chiliwili69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

ut the looking at the tests, the horizontal FOV for one eye of the CV1 is 47º (max). So the calculation should be: 1080/47= 23 which is more than the Pimax 5K&8K!

 

I think you misinterpreted the table. The left and right FOV are "half-FOV" from center to the side (lenses are not symmetrical). You need to add both values to get the FOV for one eye. I did not understand how he deduced the binocular FOV (which is almost the same), but that's irrelevant to PPD computation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, I read that wrongly. Then it is 37º+47º which makes 84º for one eye horizontal FOV for the CV1.

 

Summarizing (assuming all screen is used, which may not be true):

 

Horizontal PPD:

Rift: 1080/84= 12.8 

Pimax 5K&8K : 2560/140= 18.3  

 

Vertical PPD:

Rift: 1200/90= 13.3

Pimax 5K&8K : 1440/120= 12  

Edited by chiliwili69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCG_Fenris_Wolf

120° vertical is more important in IL 2 than a slightly higher pixel density in the Rift, for when you are in a dogfight you must look upwards. Identification may be more difficult on a vertically (point of view, your screen) passing plane though. For identification of planes in non-static pictures two things are most important, by my experience: constant 90fps to see a smoothly moving object, and input resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

I don't understand why the lower screen resolution is used in the comparison ratios for the PIMAX 8K.  Although the input will be 1440X2560, the upscaled rendered screen will be 2160X3840.  If there was no difference between the 5 and 8K rendering why wouldn't the screenshots look identical?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, I read that wrongly. Then it is 37º+47º which makes 84º for one eye horizontal FOV for the CV1.

 

Summarizing (assuming all screen is used, which may not be true):

 

Horizontal PPD:

Rift: 1080/84= 12.8

Pimax 5K&8K : 2560/140= 18.3

Vertical PPD:

Rift: 1200/90= 13.3

Pimax 5K&8K : 1440/120= 12

Pimax says they use 80% of the screens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Although the input will be 1440X2560, the upscaled rendered screen will be 2160X3840.

 

The important resolution to see more details is the resolution used for the render process. The render process send a "ray" for every pixel of the render resolution (ie 1440x2560), that ray goes from the eye position to the scene and calculate what is the colour of that pixel based in the scene textures, light sources, smoke in between, etc. So, the rendered image will be the same for the 5K and for the 8K.

The only difference is that for the 8K the image is enlarged to fit in 2160x3840, but you will not see more details. The only improvement will be that you have less SDE.

If you compare 5K and 8K images you will see that they deliver the same level of detail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Stick-95

EDIT:  Thanks for the answer and putting up with me.

 

OK but what about the "additional" detail that coconut demonstrates in his "upscaling" example.  The left would represent the 5K and the right the 8K.  The right has more "interpreted detail" but it is still a better image.

 

*snip*

 

Enlarged:

 

attachicon.gifcmp-big.png

 

The images are not the same although their size on the screen would be.  The 8K is obviously not as clear as a true direct 2160 image but I don't see it as a 1440 image either.

 

Sorry, just being thick.

Edited by VBF-12_Stick-95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@@VBF-12_Stick-95 Left image is 1200p, i.e. Oculus Rift, right is 8k. Below is 5k vs 8k

 

post-31381-0-76039900-1510088410.png

 

 

Although the input will be 1440X2560, the upscaled rendered screen will be 2160X3840.

Note that the resolution is 2560x1440, i.e. usual 16/9 landscape format. If it were in portrait mode, like in the Rift, we wouldn't get such a wide horizontal FOV (but the resolution would be fantastic!)

 

Regarding 5k vs 8k, it seems maybe only the 5k will be able to do 90Hz reliably. The story is a bit confusing though, so take that with a grain of salt.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@@VBF-12_Stick-95 Left image is 1200p, i.e. Oculus Rift, right is 8k. Below is 5k vs 8k

 

cmp-5k-8k.png

 

Note that the resolution is 2560x1440, i.e. usual 16/9 landscape format. If it were in portrait mode, like in the Rift, we wouldn't get such a wide horizontal FOV (but the resolution would be fantastic!)

 

Regarding 5k vs 8k, it seems maybe only the 5k will be able to do 90Hz reliably. The story is a bit confusing though, so take that with a grain of salt.

It looks like a bird?...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Horizontal PPD:

Rift: 1080/84= 12.8 

Pimax 5K&8K : 2560/140= 18.3 

 

For the sake of completeness:

FullHD monitor at full zoom (30 degrees):

1080/30 = 36

 

Btw, why VR zoom is not implemented? Maybe as fixed FOV binocular which you may toggle. Do other games have VR zoom?

If it is possible and does not contradict any VR philosophy/technologies then Pimax8k with software zoom may become a best choice for simmers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...