I married a lens (Nikon 35 1.4), but now it’s obsolete for the work i do 😂I could probably rig it up to my Fuji now, but then it’d be gigantic and hard to carry everywhere 🥴 But oh was it beautiful.
@@doriyancoleman Might as well face it... (old Robert Palmer joke) Alas, there's no perfect metaphors anymore - it's 2024 and marriage isn't forever... but divorce is! 😆
@@erin.v.z I feel the same way about my rather old Nikkor 50mm f1.2 AiS (which actually looks okay Franken-rigged onto a Fuji X-H2s; it renders beautifully even with the crop). Without knowing a thing about the work you do, might I suggest the Voigtländer 23mm F1.2 Nokton for Fuji X mount? Yeah, it's manual focus, but it's got CPU contacts so you're good for Aperture Priority on a Fuji. 35mil equivalent and there's something really dreamy about shooting wide open with that...
Hey Doriyan, great vid. Will definitely subscribe to your newsletter. I think there's another important thing to mention here. I'm a middle aged guy so I've known the megapixel debate for a long time. One of the big arguments that used to be a factor was print size. You could only lower print resolution so much before it started looking bad. And then you'd have to upscale the photo. And, back in the 2000s, that meant that you'd start printing pixels that were clearly visible to the naked eye - and they looked even worse if they were blurred at large scale. But times have changed. Machine learning based upscaling allows you to upscale a photograph - not so that you have more detail that people don't really care about - but to avoid the nasty pixelation at scale. What details are there are rendered sharp and pleasingly. I do not exaggerate when I say that this means that, on average, a 10MP photograph will do just as well as a 40MP photograph at 20"x18". Unless you got that perfect sharpness with a sharp lens stopped down, high shutter speed, low ISO, and a stabilised image, the 40MP image will not have any more detail. And those details will only be noticeable to people who lean in to inspect them. This is all to say that megapixel counts have become less important than they ever were. In fact I did shoot my 2006 10MP Nikon D200 a lot on a recent trip along with my 24MP (IIR) Nikon D600. And the images were beautiful. And if I need to print them large, no problem. I also enjoy my 16MP Fujifilm XE1 with the lovely xtrans1 sensor. All of these cameras take wonderful images with no lack of detail on social media. And in the rare case I want to print large, all of them can do a stellar job.
Times have definitely changed! That’s why I’m happy that (for example) 24-40MP is the standard package, digital medium format is becoming more accessible, and that the craft overall is more democratized. Things that were roadblocks a few decades ago are now much more manageable.
Great video, thanks. I fully agree that megapixels belief is probably the biggest lie (or close to) tell themselves (and that manufacturers leverage quite effectively). The next biggest lie IMO is that bigger sensors are better than smaller sensors, but clearly we disagree on number 2.
I haven't been doing photography for long. I remember when photography commentators and reviewers were praising the superior virtues of 24MP sensors, and how it somehow meant that everything was now creatively possible. The internet was flooded with stunning images captured in said resolution, and G.A.S. ran rampant among those of us watching the RUclips videos and Instagram feeds. Then, higher MP sensor cameras were released, and suddenly any camera brand manufacturing paltry 24MP hardware was basically operating in the stone age... and so on, as each new generation of photographic technology emerged. None of this is ever said explicitly of course, but it's the vibe I get consistently. I had to talk myself into accepting that my 26MP crop sensor camera is actually more capable than I will EVER need it to be. I am truly content in the knowledge that it's my (only) camera for as long as it keeps functioning.
I've never had a body more than 16mp and I've been doing a few paid shoots this year with no complaints about resolution. I don't know how well my computer handles anything higher than 16mp so I've been hovering there for years and I'm mostly happy with it. I've done several paid jobs this year with it.
👍 I still use my D7000 for some landscape stuff (16mp). But I bought an fujifilm x-t5 for a smaller lighter kit as I’m now a retired senior, but more specifically for the film sims. I’ve always been too impatient and unskilled at editing my photos so this now better fits my bill. I’m am positive I will never make full use of the 40MP as I don’t super crop nor do I print large. Thank you for your content sir, well said.
Fully agreed, Doriyan. I use modern Fujifilm gear on a daily basis but if I was asked what was the best camera I own, I'd probably say my 12MP 5D Classic.
Back when I started my camera of choice was a Nikon D80 with something like 10mp and I had many full page photos from that printed in glossy mags, same with the D700 I went to after that. Then I got a D800 which was something of a monster with its 36mp back in those days. There was nothing like it, and it took amazing pictures, but the workflow got so much more cumbersome with the huge files, so I “down graded” to m4/3 and the 20mp photos I get from that is perfectly fine for the prints I do, which is usually 30x40. If you want sharp images you mostly need a good lens and good lighting, and you’ll be sorted.
I learned digital on my boyfriend at the time’s D80, but it was quite a feat because it was programmed in another language and couldn’t be changed 😂 But then i got d40, a couple D300s and finally a D700 to shoot professionally. I loved it, but sold all of it to get a small Fuji x-s20 so i wouldn’t have to be editing (the film sims to me really are a dream).
@@erin.v.z I got myself the Fuji X100 (original) about the same time I got the D800, and I really loved that camera and still have it on a shelf. It was partly the reason I went and got myself m4/3 gear since it was both small and a lot easier to find lenses second hand back in those days compared to Fujifilm.
That D800 series is the stuff of legends! As someone who’s spent a lot of time with Fuji’s 40MP cameras (and a short loaner with the GFX 50Sii), storage workflow is a big consideration as you pointed out. A trade off I’m happy to make as this is my passion/career, but the everyday photographer has to think about it. Thank you for watching!
I completely agree with you in every respect, not too long ago I got the XF33 f/1.4 and it its better/sharper/faster (whatever) than the XF35 f/2, but I can only tell the difference if I’m doing the pixel peeping “thing” and my X-T4 is still perfect for my street and wildlife photography.
My guy Enrique 🤝 that delta of difference that we notice from pixel peeping can matter, but we have to judge the trade offs! Glad you have a reliable kit regardless.
I wish I would have bought the Fuji XH2S so I didn't have 40MP. The 40MP should have been an X model of it's own class like XH2 R. Now I face a larder problem with Fuji. It's autofocus. I am hoping they fix it coming up. I intended on using it for events and upgraded to have more accurate focus. Fingers 🤞
Indeed! My video cameras are (GH5s and GH5ii) like 21mp. My photography cameras (X-Pro3 and X-T3) are 26mp but an increase in sensor size from MFT. I decided that I would like to revisit Landscape Photography and briefly considered a GFX 50 or 50sii as both can be had for a mere £2000 but then I thought that a step up to Full Frame would be (the sensible thing) more than adequate and opted for a Lumix S5 (I don’t need autofocus) with a measly 24mp but a Full Frame sensor ie another increase in sensor size . . . . Plus it was £700 (mint condition and 660 activations) and then £60 for a photodiox pro fusion EF-L mount adapter ( another bargain) for my lovely Tamron SP lenses. . . . and there was peace in the valley!
I've been reading a lot about Panasonic’s system lately and they seem like an underrated, incredible value. Mint for $700 is a crazy deal! Glad you’ve found a system that works for you
I have four cameras: one is 16 mpx, two are 24 and one is 26. To be honest, I’ve never needed any more than that - and don’t see that changing in the future.
I was pretty happy with 24… but since getting a 40 and a 45.. being able to crop has been so valuable at times.. actual IQ the 40+ isn’t that needed but for range yh
I have straight out of camera jpeg photos from my (2003) Canon 10d with 6 megapixels that you would not know came from it. Smooth and colorful is my take on it. Granted the focusing was primitive compared to newer cameras and higher than 800 iso was a no go. (If my memory serves me) they definitely have a unique look. Maybe its time to give it another go……need a new battery.
people talking about megapixels and needing the newest camera is so funny to me considering I use a film cameras from the 80s and 90s. never fall into the trap if thinking the newer camera will give you a better images, the only thing that can do that is you. Great vid as always
People want max resolution to afterwards just complain about that clinical look, which lead them to slap a mist filter on it... and then go on the internet to complain their images are all blooming hard. . I mean, jokes aside, just look some of the all time favorite movies from the 90's, 00's, or even older, like the Matrix, Gladiator, etc. It always comes back to tone, color, composition and storytelling. Resolution is just a tool, not the goal. Most movies today are shot in 4K and delivered in 2K to be watched, which equates to being about a 4 megapixel image. And somehow 26 megapixels is not enough? . The one thing i find useful in high MP count is if I want to crop a lot, but it's usually not ever that agressive, just trimming the image a bit. I wouldn't want to shoot everything at 100 MP with a super clinical lens just in case i want to crop it to 10 MP later. So, yeah, 24~26 MP is the sweet spot.
I have sort of the opposite. I’ve got a pretty small Fuji x-s20 and I’d love something even more compact (ideally an x70 at its original pricing). Something with film sims that fits into even my smallest bags and then I’d be ready all the time and would grow exponentially as a photographer. I’m pretty sure this is a lie too, but doesn’t stop me from hoping for one 😂
Kiddo i used to shoot wildlife a7r4 w/60 mpxls and no matter how good my technique was I got inconsistent results. I switched to an a9 and it made my results much better at half the rez. The other issue is some glass can't fully resolve the hi mgpxl sensors correctly. I bet some of fuji older glass struggles with the new 40 sensor they have
I’ve heard similar things from others who’ve moved from the M10/prior generation to the M10R and M11. More megapixels isn’t the free lunch we sometimes think it is!
I'm genuinely asking this (I don't know the answer) - but if you're going to creatively edit the photo before later downscaling to Instagram resolution, isn't it broadly better to have the highest resolution possible for your initial RAW file? As in - generally - that would result in a 'better' end result than if we shot in a lower res? At least that's how it works in music production; even though the final output there is typically 16 Bit 44.1 kHz Wav, people often work in far higher resolutions eg 32 Bit 192 kHz. [NB I'm not any kind of hi-res fanboi; I'm still using my 16.1 MP Sony Nex-5T as my daily-carry.]
I’ve been a dedicated 4/3 and m4/3 user since it inception so no I don’t care about megapixels. I don’t want Olympus/OMS to jump higher than 20mp even though I’m probably 0 percent in that. No the biggest lie I tell myself has been I have no interest in video. But lately I’ve been doing a deep dive in learning how to incorporate video into my photos to make a story.
xt-4 is $1000 and xt-5 $1700, I'm gonna run that xt-5 till the wheels fall of, to lets say i'm gonna use it for 4 years. $700/5 years = $140 per year. What's $140? dinner for family of 3😢
nothing new said here, but the next creativity will be the programming/manipulation of cameras. we live in such a weird time where many videos need to reiterate the same message
I don't get it what's with all that high mp cameras! I have Hasselblad X2D and image is just fine. In fact, much better than my old Nikon cameras who had 36mp. Images are just better on X2D 🤔
Compare the new matrix movie image with the original matrix trilogy image and tell me which one looks better... The new one looks kinda disgusting to me, I can see all the little wrinkles on the actors faces, everything else is out of focus, why would anyone think that is a good thing? For me, people tend to compensate the lack in "quality image" with excess of "image quality", if you know what I mean.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
When digital first came out, I could easily make magazine cover quality images with 4 megapixels.
I believe it!
Date the body; marry the lens.
I’m addicted to love 😅📸
I married a lens (Nikon 35 1.4), but now it’s obsolete for the work i do 😂I could probably rig it up to my Fuji now, but then it’d be gigantic and hard to carry everywhere 🥴 But oh was it beautiful.
@@doriyancoleman Might as well face it... (old Robert Palmer joke)
Alas, there's no perfect metaphors anymore - it's 2024 and marriage isn't forever... but divorce is! 😆
@@erin.v.z I feel the same way about my rather old Nikkor 50mm f1.2 AiS (which actually looks okay Franken-rigged onto a Fuji X-H2s; it renders beautifully even with the crop).
Without knowing a thing about the work you do, might I suggest the Voigtländer 23mm F1.2 Nokton for Fuji X mount? Yeah, it's manual focus, but it's got CPU contacts so you're good for Aperture Priority on a Fuji. 35mil equivalent and there's something really dreamy about shooting wide open with that...
Hey Doriyan, great vid. Will definitely subscribe to your newsletter. I think there's another important thing to mention here. I'm a middle aged guy so I've known the megapixel debate for a long time. One of the big arguments that used to be a factor was print size. You could only lower print resolution so much before it started looking bad. And then you'd have to upscale the photo. And, back in the 2000s, that meant that you'd start printing pixels that were clearly visible to the naked eye - and they looked even worse if they were blurred at large scale.
But times have changed. Machine learning based upscaling allows you to upscale a photograph - not so that you have more detail that people don't really care about - but to avoid the nasty pixelation at scale. What details are there are rendered sharp and pleasingly. I do not exaggerate when I say that this means that, on average, a 10MP photograph will do just as well as a 40MP photograph at 20"x18".
Unless you got that perfect sharpness with a sharp lens stopped down, high shutter speed, low ISO, and a stabilised image, the 40MP image will not have any more detail. And those details will only be noticeable to people who lean in to inspect them.
This is all to say that megapixel counts have become less important than they ever were. In fact I did shoot my 2006 10MP Nikon D200 a lot on a recent trip along with my 24MP (IIR) Nikon D600. And the images were beautiful. And if I need to print them large, no problem. I also enjoy my 16MP Fujifilm XE1 with the lovely xtrans1 sensor. All of these cameras take wonderful images with no lack of detail on social media.
And in the rare case I want to print large, all of them can do a stellar job.
Times have definitely changed! That’s why I’m happy that (for example) 24-40MP is the standard package, digital medium format is becoming more accessible, and that the craft overall is more democratized. Things that were roadblocks a few decades ago are now much more manageable.
This is the first time I've heard of this, about full frame or expensive lenses - yes, but megapixels
Great video, thanks. I fully agree that megapixels belief is probably the biggest lie (or close to) tell themselves (and that manufacturers leverage quite effectively). The next biggest lie IMO is that bigger sensors are better than smaller sensors, but clearly we disagree on number 2.
Thanks! There’s definitely give and take with sensor size 🤝
I haven't been doing photography for long. I remember when photography commentators and reviewers were praising the superior virtues of 24MP sensors, and how it somehow meant that everything was now creatively possible. The internet was flooded with stunning images captured in said resolution, and G.A.S. ran rampant among those of us watching the RUclips videos and Instagram feeds.
Then, higher MP sensor cameras were released, and suddenly any camera brand manufacturing paltry 24MP hardware was basically operating in the stone age... and so on, as each new generation of photographic technology emerged.
None of this is ever said explicitly of course, but it's the vibe I get consistently.
I had to talk myself into accepting that my 26MP crop sensor camera is actually more capable than I will EVER need it to be. I am truly content in the knowledge that it's my (only) camera for as long as it keeps functioning.
That timeline checks out. Ten years from now when 60MP sensors are the standard, we’ll share a laugh when 40MP becomes “not enough” 😂
Great points and video!
And am really happy for you for selling the wonderful prints! Well deserved appreciation and recognition of you art!
Thank you! 😄
NOT PACK A PUNCH 😭😭
You know it 😂👊🏾
First time seeing your channel. Appreciate your perspective and more importantly your photos. So I sub'd. Well done
Thanks Dennis 🤝
I've never had a body more than 16mp and I've been doing a few paid shoots this year with no complaints about resolution. I don't know how well my computer handles anything higher than 16mp so I've been hovering there for years and I'm mostly happy with it. I've done several paid jobs this year with it.
👍 I still use my D7000 for some landscape stuff (16mp). But I bought an fujifilm x-t5 for a smaller lighter kit as I’m now a retired senior, but more specifically for the film sims. I’ve always been too impatient and unskilled at editing my photos so this now better fits my bill. I’m am positive I will never make full use of the 40MP as I don’t super crop nor do I print large. Thank you for your content sir, well said.
Fuji’s color science is lovely. I appreciate the kind words!
Fully agreed, Doriyan. I use modern Fujifilm gear on a daily basis but if I was asked what was the best camera I own, I'd probably say my 12MP 5D Classic.
Use what you love! Thank you for sharing your thoughts 🤝
Back when I started my camera of choice was a Nikon D80 with something like 10mp and I had many full page photos from that printed in glossy mags, same with the D700 I went to after that. Then I got a D800 which was something of a monster with its 36mp back in those days. There was nothing like it, and it took amazing pictures, but the workflow got so much more cumbersome with the huge files, so I “down graded” to m4/3 and the 20mp photos I get from that is perfectly fine for the prints I do, which is usually 30x40. If you want sharp images you mostly need a good lens and good lighting, and you’ll be sorted.
I learned digital on my boyfriend at the time’s D80, but it was quite a feat because it was programmed in another language and couldn’t be changed 😂 But then i got d40, a couple D300s and finally a D700 to shoot professionally. I loved it, but sold all of it to get a small Fuji x-s20 so i wouldn’t have to be editing (the film sims to me really are a dream).
@@erin.v.z I got myself the Fuji X100 (original) about the same time I got the D800, and I really loved that camera and still have it on a shelf. It was partly the reason I went and got myself m4/3 gear since it was both small and a lot easier to find lenses second hand back in those days compared to Fujifilm.
That D800 series is the stuff of legends! As someone who’s spent a lot of time with Fuji’s 40MP cameras (and a short loaner with the GFX 50Sii), storage workflow is a big consideration as you pointed out. A trade off I’m happy to make as this is my passion/career, but the everyday photographer has to think about it. Thank you for watching!
This is exactly why I can't take all those new cellphones with 58285849mp cameras seriously
48MP is the highest I care about for phones tbh. However, I’m glad the sensor size & software have improved over time
The best video out right now
I appreciate the love Danan 🤝
@@doriyancoleman 💯🫡😤
Honestly, how many of us REALLY, even need 24mp? Most of us don't print.
Good question! 🤔
Love it man.
Much appreciated!
As a fellow photographer and guitarist the sickness (AKA G.A.S.) rings true for most hobbies lol
I completely agree with you in every respect, not too long ago I got the XF33 f/1.4 and it its better/sharper/faster (whatever) than the XF35 f/2, but I can only tell the difference if I’m doing the pixel peeping “thing” and my X-T4 is still perfect for my street and wildlife photography.
My guy Enrique 🤝 that delta of difference that we notice from pixel peeping can matter, but we have to judge the trade offs! Glad you have a reliable kit regardless.
I wish I would have bought the Fuji XH2S so I didn't have 40MP. The 40MP should have been an X model of it's own class like XH2 R. Now I face a larder problem with Fuji. It's autofocus. I am hoping they fix it coming up. I intended on using it for events and upgraded to have more accurate focus. Fingers 🤞
X-H2s is one of the best on the market. Incredible camera
Photography is about composition and lighting.
Indeed! My video cameras are (GH5s and GH5ii) like 21mp. My photography cameras (X-Pro3 and X-T3) are 26mp but an increase in sensor size from MFT.
I decided that I would like to revisit Landscape Photography and briefly considered a GFX 50 or 50sii as both can be had for a mere £2000 but then I thought that a step up to Full Frame would be (the sensible thing) more than adequate and opted for a Lumix S5 (I don’t need autofocus) with a measly 24mp but a Full Frame sensor ie another increase in sensor size . . . . Plus it was £700 (mint condition and 660 activations) and then £60 for a photodiox pro fusion EF-L mount adapter ( another bargain) for my lovely Tamron SP lenses. . . . and there was peace in the valley!
I've been reading a lot about Panasonic’s system lately and they seem like an underrated, incredible value. Mint for $700 is a crazy deal! Glad you’ve found a system that works for you
I have four cameras: one is 16 mpx, two are 24 and one is 26. To be honest, I’ve never needed any more than that - and don’t see that changing in the future.
The Goldilocks zone!
I was pretty happy with 24… but since getting a 40 and a 45.. being able to crop has been so valuable at times.. actual IQ the 40+ isn’t that needed but for range yh
@@AshBashSneakers how often are you cropping in? Just curious
I have straight out of camera jpeg photos from my (2003) Canon 10d with 6 megapixels that you would not know came from it. Smooth and colorful is my take on it. Granted the focusing was primitive compared to newer cameras and higher than 800 iso was a no go. (If my memory serves me) they definitely have a unique look. Maybe its time to give it another go……need a new battery.
people talking about megapixels and needing the newest camera is so funny to me considering I use a film cameras from the 80s and 90s. never fall into the trap if thinking the newer camera will give you a better images, the only thing that can do that is you. Great vid as always
I need my 61mp camera to scan my film 🤣
Thanks! 24-40 is my sweet spot.
@jordanlaine7412 great point 😂
People want max resolution to afterwards just complain about that clinical look, which lead them to slap a mist filter on it... and then go on the internet to complain their images are all blooming hard. . I mean, jokes aside, just look some of the all time favorite movies from the 90's, 00's, or even older, like the Matrix, Gladiator, etc. It always comes back to tone, color, composition and storytelling. Resolution is just a tool, not the goal. Most movies today are shot in 4K and delivered in 2K to be watched, which equates to being about a 4 megapixel image. And somehow 26 megapixels is not enough? . The one thing i find useful in high MP count is if I want to crop a lot, but it's usually not ever that agressive, just trimming the image a bit. I wouldn't want to shoot everything at 100 MP with a super clinical lens just in case i want to crop it to 10 MP later. So, yeah, 24~26 MP is the sweet spot.
I have sort of the opposite. I’ve got a pretty small Fuji x-s20 and I’d love something even more compact (ideally an x70 at its original pricing). Something with film sims that fits into even my smallest bags and then I’d be ready all the time and would grow exponentially as a photographer. I’m pretty sure this is a lie too, but doesn’t stop me from hoping for one 😂
I co-sign your wish! 📸
Kiddo i used to shoot wildlife a7r4 w/60 mpxls and no matter how good my technique was I got inconsistent results. I switched to an a9 and it made my results much better at half the rez. The other issue is some glass can't fully resolve the hi mgpxl sensors correctly. I bet some of fuji older glass struggles with the new 40 sensor they have
Great point about glass not being able to fully resolve certain sensors. There's always some give and take!
So true. To this day I wish I didn’t sell my
M10p for a m10r. I liked everything I was seeing on 24 compare to 42.
I’ve heard similar things from others who’ve moved from the M10/prior generation to the M10R and M11. More megapixels isn’t the free lunch we sometimes think it is!
I'm genuinely asking this (I don't know the answer) - but if you're going to creatively edit the photo before later downscaling to Instagram resolution, isn't it broadly better to have the highest resolution possible for your initial RAW file? As in - generally - that would result in a 'better' end result than if we shot in a lower res? At least that's how it works in music production; even though the final output there is typically 16 Bit 44.1 kHz Wav, people often work in far higher resolutions eg 32 Bit 192 kHz. [NB I'm not any kind of hi-res fanboi; I'm still using my 16.1 MP Sony Nex-5T as my daily-carry.]
Tbh I have no idea. I shoot RAW, then export JPEG (online sharing) and TIFF (conservation, possible prints, etc)
I’ve been a dedicated 4/3 and m4/3 user since it inception so no I don’t care about megapixels. I don’t want Olympus/OMS to jump higher than 20mp even though I’m probably 0 percent in that. No the biggest lie I tell myself has been I have no interest in video. But lately I’ve been doing a deep dive in learning how to incorporate video into my photos to make a story.
Take that dive! You may find that you'll enjoy it.
GIMME A 20 MINUTE VIDEO OF YOUR WISDOM YOU COWARD!
But bars as always.
Thank you bro 😂 maybe someday!
My phone can take 100mp images and they look awful. My camera takes around 24mg images and can look (in better hands!) amazing!
Camera sensors outclass phones by a long shot!
xt-4 is $1000 and xt-5 $1700, I'm gonna run that xt-5 till the wheels fall of, to lets say i'm gonna use it for 4 years. $700/5 years = $140 per year. What's $140? dinner for family of 3😢
We had a couple times where we had to stretch $140 across the ends of the earth when it came to food 😂
nothing new said here, but the next creativity will be the programming/manipulation of cameras. we live in such a weird time where many videos need to reiterate the same message
Thanks for watching
Doriyan upload video. I click video.
Much love! 🙏🏾
Twenty Fouriyan Coleman tells no lies!
My man 🫡
👏👏👏
I don't get it what's with all that high mp cameras! I have Hasselblad X2D and image is just fine. In fact, much better than my old Nikon cameras who had 36mp. Images are just better on X2D 🤔
I’m not against it 📸
@@doriyancoleman i know man, im just f#$%/@g with you 😀
Compare the new matrix movie image with the original matrix trilogy image and tell me which one looks better... The new one looks kinda disgusting to me, I can see all the little wrinkles on the actors faces, everything else is out of focus, why would anyone think that is a good thing? For me, people tend to compensate the lack in "quality image" with excess of "image quality", if you know what I mean.