Solving the Canon R5C Noise Issue | Testing various solutions and fixing the problem
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- If you're struggling with noise in your Canon R5C camera, this video is for you. Adrian walks you through a range of techniques and strategies for reducing noise in your videos. From adjusting your camera settings to post-processing in software, you'll learn everything you need to know to get crystal clear images, so you can take control of your Canon R5C and produce stunning, noise-free images.Thanks for watching! Please do share helpful feedback.
Download the original test footage here: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
Check out our other videos:
/ @naikmedia
Find us online & social media:
www.naikmedia.com
mindfulmarketing.uk 
Кино
Wonderful, just what I needed to know with my R5C. Thanks for taking the time to compare and share the results because this also saves me time on the technical and gives me more energy back into being creative!
Glad it was helpful :) now go be creative!!
Amazing follow up video! Your research has made me realize that I need to look at the base ISO’s in a completely different way haha thanks brother! 🙌🏼
Aw cheers Brandon, thank you 🙌🏻 This new info is going to completely change how I approach filming certain scenarios. Really hope it helps you get the most out of your camera! Ad
Hi Adrian! Thank you so much for taking the time to put all of this together! Videos like this are a lot of work and I appreciate your efforts! I am definitely going to try raising my base ISO and using a lower ISO for filming. It’s interesting because I shoot a weekly info video and I use ISO 160 at a base ISO of 800; and never see any noise at all despite using Rembrandt lighting with a dark purple background. Perhaps a firmware upgrade from Canon with c-log 2 would help? Thanks again! Please keep up the great videos!
Hey Tony, thank you! I really appreciate the feedback and insight =) a C Log 2 firmware upgrade from Canon would be great to finally get to give us more options but I think it's probably still going to have this issue due to the sensor's limitation. Would be interesting to see, but I won't hold my breath knowing Canon! Ad
This was a great test, the results being somewhat what I would have expected based on the dual base iso capabilities of the camera. This is direct from Canon. “The EOS R5 C is the first Cinema EOS camera to offer Dual Base ISO functionality. Dual Base ISO expands sensitivity and minimises noise when shooting in low light environments. Options of 800/3200 ISO are available when shooting in Canon Log 3, and 400/1600 ISO when shooting in BT.709 Wide DR, PQ and HLG.”
So in wide DR clean base iso seems to be 1600.
What I don’t understand though is how you are loosing stops of light by going with the higher base iso. I get that as you move away from the sensor’s native base iso you move away from it’s optimal dynamic range capability. But what this shows me is the claim that this camera does 14 stops of DR is a bit misleading as once you get to the edge of those stops you are getting a much less clean image and the camera sweet spot is what you showed in your tests with base at 3200 iso and therefore 12 to maybe 13 stops of usable and clean DR.
Hey Michael, thanks for the kind feedback, and the insight! I think this is where the difference in manufacturer DR measurements and real life measurements. If you haven’t already seen it, check out @geraldundone for his review of this camera. His results are WAY more scientific than mine, and show a 12.5ish real life DR. Nothing to be laughed at. The camera has excellent dynamic range when maximising its capabilities (with base iso and hyper exposed raw). Ad
RUclips just suggest this to me now. That was great. Thank you.
Thanks for stopping by! Glad it was useful :)
Thank you for testing the camera. By rating the camera two stops lower (from 3200 to 800 ISO), you will be able to achieve a cleaner image by reducing the dynamic range by two stops. It is important to keep in mind that at native ISO, you will get the best dynamic range but not the best noise performance. Sony refers to this "workaround" as Cine EI, and it is a technique that has been used in the past by "pulling" analog film. Therefore, it is crucial to consider the dynamic range when determining how to rate the camera. Additionally, when evaluating the performance of noise reduction, it is important to consider that it may behave differently when the image is moving, particularly when a temporal noise reduction is applied. In theory, only spatial noise reduction should be fine in this case.
Brilliant insight, thank you Jonas! I’d recommend to R5C users to go for 3200 @ Base 3200 (using an ND for exposure compensation) to have decent noise performance and better dynamic range. Do you reckon that’s better than losing 2 stops of DR? Ad
Hey Jonas, just to be clear...if I shoot on my R5C at a "Base ISO 3200" and my actual ISO at "800", the dynamic range will lower by 2 stops? Or will I still achieve maximum dynamic range because my base ISO is still set to 3200? Seems like I prefer to shoot at Base ISO 3200 because of the clean image but want to know if that will hinder my DR versus shooting at a "Base ISO 800" with my ISO set at 800. Sorry if there is any confusion haha
@@brandonbrodie4547 the iso doesn't matter actually, it's shutter speed plus aperture matters. the base iso 800 is only iso 160 but make the shadow brighter, the goal of this fake iso is to make people set higer shutter speed and aperture to retain highlight, to get 2 stops more highlight means you get 2stops more noise in shadow, the iso3200 seem less noisy is because it is actually iso 800 and it has more noise reduction. so normally if you want to shoot clog3 for less noise in daylight, expose for 2more stops or lower iso from 800 to 200, of course you have to sacrifice some dynamic range. you just can't have both.
And it is more lovely when it comes with a massive banding 😐 what is theorically contrary but my C70 did it. I was shocked with the C70 footage not a bit.
Banding on the C70? Wouldn’t have guessed it … ouch!
***This is for shooting in Log***
This might sound a little counter intuitive, but Canon’s ISO for Dynamic Rage & Log Data sheets for other cameras suggests that to get more dynamic range in the shadows (below middle grey), choosing an ISO ‘Lower’ than the base ISO, is the best way to get more information in the shadows. And with more information in the shadows, it would give better performance with the noise.
Which I believe, is what you’re seeing with choosing the Base ISO of 3200, but shooting in 800 ISO.
(Shutter speed and aperture permitting) I wonder what would happen to the noise in these images if you chose the Base ISO of 800, but recorded in (400) 200 or even 100?
According to the data sheets, it would suggest the noise would clean up here too? (Again other parameters permitting).
Recording in an iso setting below the base iso actually crushes the shadows more, reducing dynamic range (base iso will always have the most latitude). By recording an iso below the base and crushing the blacks slightly gives a cleaner looking image, but reduced DR.
This is what I’ve learned from watching other videos on the subject (Crimson Engine does a good one on it)
@@NaikMedia Awesome, thanks so much for the reply, and yep you’re absolutely spot on.
Apologies I’ve just re-read my above comment, and you’ve more accurately described what I was trying (and failed) to get at.
You do lose Dynamic Range, as the bottom two stops get crushed and you lose DR above middle grey.
Here’s the video (or one of them) from Crimson Engine, where Rubidium describes what happens when you shoot below native ISO and why doing this gives you a cleaner, less noisey image. (Same applies but he’s using the C200)
ruclips.net/video/xit6Pyouj9I/видео.htmlsi=41rSwbnFbgixf4tp
(Time @ 2:32)
Am I understanding this correctly though, is this what you saw in this video with the R5C - choosing Base ISO 3200, and shooting below it in ISO 800 - resulting in a less noisy image?
If so, I still wonder if you’d get the same or similar results using the lower Base ISO 800 and shooting in even lower ISO’s (say ISO 200 or ISO 100)?
Thanks so much again, thanks for the video, and thanks for helping clear up my previous comment.
So sorry for the slow response and thanks for linking the CR video (Rubidium…what a name - I love it!). Thank you for your comments too and the discussion :)
I think what you say is accurate. So:
Base ISO 800 + 100/200/400 iso = less noise, but lower dynamic range. Same for Base 3200 + 800/1600iso.
People go on about dynamic range these days like it’s the be all and end all. Knowing that using below base iso helps reduce noise but lowers the DR is just another very useful tool in our belt.
@@NaikMedia absolutely agreed. Thanks so much for the reply too (and absolutely no apologies necessary 🤩🙌). Love it! And keep up the amazing work!
Cheers mate!
THANKS A LOT....GOD BLESS YOU :)
Glad it was helpful! :)
Excellent video once again very valuable info here I have one question what if I shoot in raw does this still apply or is there even a noise issue with shooting raw
Hey McNeill - thanks again for the kind words =) shooting raw tends to introduce even more noise than using MXF files as there is zero noise reduction. It's something I'll try out next time I do one of these tests and share what I find, but I'm guessing there will be equal noise if not more. Ad
@@NaikMedia yea that is what I was scared of but thanks I’ll be looking forward to it
At ISO 800 the R5 c has good lattitude in the highlights using clog 3. Over exposing by 1 to 2 stops and correcting in post is very effective for reducing noise.
Thanks for the insight! A very helpful tip =) Ad
@@NaikMedia thats why i think the c70 is a better solution...clog2 and bringing up the shadows with no noise at all...
@@NaikMediaShooting at ISO base 800 and ISO 800 simultaneously seems to produce more chroma noise in the shadows. Shooting at ISO 800 without the base selected is cleaner.
Expose to the right in production and then lower the exposure in post?
Thanks for the suggestion Rodrigo =) Yes, that is an another way to address the issue. I personally don't like overexposing the image to bring it down in post, so I tried to find a solution that works in camera. Ad
Hi there! Great content! Congratulations!!! I'm having an issue with my r5c that I would like to know if you also have that "problem". It is possible to "burn" a Lut into every picture profile. I'm trying to record in clog3 with a Lut, for speed delivery purposes. No need to color grade afterwards and have clog benefit. The problem is that when I do that, specially in 8k modes, black levels are getting raised, I don't know why... Black levels should be near 0 but when I preview the footage, they are around 9 or 10, making this feature useless. Could you please try this and tell me if you also get this problem? I have the latest firmware and I've tried several fixes with no success ( sry for my English, I hope you understand) Thanks!!
Hey Vitor - thanks for the comment! I appreciate you stopping by. I've not given this a try before as I prefer to keep footage in a neutral grade for reusability (rather than baking in a LUT I might want to change later). I'll give it a try when I get an opportunity and see if I get the same issue. Have you tried reaching out to Canon? Ad
@@NaikMedia Thank you for answering :) didn't have the chance to reach to canon yet.
@@vitorquental3628 Do let us all know if you hear from them! =) Ad
Hi Adrian, from your result, the SNR is quite worse even for 800/800 case. For that case (800/800), what is the R G B value (approx) you are getting out of 1023 levels for the highlight parts of the as shot clip? What are the R G B values for the black part? As shot means ungraded clip.
Thanks for the comment Carson, although this is going behind my expertise - not sure how to check that. Ad
@@NaikMedia You can use the waveform scope in video editor to see the value.
Interesting observation. Are those tests at the beginning 1/3 of the video in XF-AVC or in RAW? Does changing your base ISO matter in RAW..?
Thanks for the question Eric =) All the tests and footage I shoot are in XF-AVC. I'm not a good resource for information on raw as I never use it, but from my limited knowledge on the subject, I believe that base iso is all about how the sensor is optimised by the manufacturer for DR and colour rendition - so this should apply regardless of shooting/file format. So what applies for XF-AVC should apply for raw, if what I say is correct. I'm hoping to get a raw vs XF-AVC comparison shot at some point - watch this space =D Ad
I was a huge fan of Neat Video for noise reduction. However, the other week I was rendering a very long project in Adobe Premiere (roughly 1 hour final cut) and it kept crashing because Neat kept running out of RAM (I have a 96GB system). So now for long projects, I use the Magic Bullet Denoiser.
That’s crazy that it filled that amount of RAM! Yikes. Neat video is not the most efficient, but price wise Magic Bullet is also crazy. The new owners of Red Giant have ruined that company with their greed.
Maybe this method of reducing noise in camera will save you some time! :)
Thanks for presenting an alternative for others who have the same issue you experienced! Ad
@@NaikMedia I agree! I do love Neat Video (because of how amazing the automatic settings are) and it's much cheaper. But yeah, I was running behind on a deadline and needed a fast solution to denoise (because the built-in Adobe tool is terrible).
Sometimes you have to do what it takes to hit that deadline, even if it means shelling out for some vital software. Must have been frustrating though.
When we’re creating a big project with a lot of Neat Video applied it will often crash FCPX - less so on the Pro Max. What I do then is only apply Neat Video to a single clip in a scene, tweak settings for that single clip, then let it render. I check it looks good, deactivate the effect and then copy that NV effect (while deactivated) to the rest of the clips in that scene. Do this for every scene, being sure to deactivate NV each time. Once that’s done and you’re ready to offload, turn off background render and reactivate Neat Video on all clips. *Don’t let it render!* Then offload the file.
This works in FCPX, but can’t say for PP.
Ideally NV would sort their program out and make it more efficient! Ad
This is the same noise response to the Lumix s5ii, many people complain about the noise when underexposed and the green shift. Using base iso 3200 will fix the issue.
Thanks for sharing - I didn't' realise the Lumix had the same issue. Using base 3200 seems to be the solution for both these cameras!
What would you suggest for a r6 mk2 body that is getting lots of noise in under exposed parts of the scene
I have the same issue with mine. It tends to be much better in 4K settings (the 1080p is awful when underexposed).
Expose to the right when in c log3, or shoot in a neutral profile.
@@NaikMedia is the answer to switch to Sony 🤣
If you want poor product support, planned obsolescence, and underspeced video codecs, then sure ;)
Is this in log footage only? Does overexposing by 2 stop helps?
Thanks for the comment =) I'm sure that would fix the noise issue as this would mean that the underexposed areas would be better exposed; however if there were any areas that were below that threshold we'd still have the noise issue. Shooting at Base ISO 3200 would prevent the noise and still give you the latitude at 3200. I'll keep testing and see if the overexposure works. Ad
Heh, "disgusting and unusable" is still a lot better looking than what we called "really fantastic for a youtube video" not that long ago. It's funny how fast expectations change.
True, tech is moving very fast and so are expectations (especially for video nerds like us!). It’s still the case that good content will trump image quality every time though. There’s a RUclipsr called lindybeige who records videos with a potato but every video is gold.
I was shooting an unboxing in a cropped in on the desk about 1.5. I noticed really hard shadows that I could not bring back. Not sure if this is the same issue but I appreciate your video
Was it crunched blacks in the shadows (ie zero detail) or was it noisy reds on the shadows? In either case, over exposing while protecting highlights is the solution I found.
Since doing this I haven’t seen any unwanted noise in the shadows.
@@NaikMedia yeah it was definitely due to underexposing. Have to remind myself to overexpose. First camera that shoots in a log profile. Really appreciate your video.
@@NaikMedia it was crunched blacks in the shadows zero detail.
Glad it was helpful! Some canon cameras don’t need overexposing in log (eg c70) but the r5c definitely does. It’s frustrating but you’ll get used to it, and then the footage will really shine.
I think the image out this camera (especially since the Netflix update) is way better than the c70.
I wonder what cameras were used in the "million pound menu" in netflix, by far the noisiest show i have ever seen in this platform... and then Netflix decides to ban this ovr noise...
Yeah, I think the banned this simply because they didn’t want to approve any hybrid/mirrorless cameras. I’m convinced Canon was affronted and ‘finessed’ the situation but that’s just speculation 😁
Good content is good content at the end of the day, even if filmed on a potato (eg Blair Witch Project, Black Swan)
Sorry, but this click bait “Solved” is a complete lie. You didn’t actually “Solve” anything. You simply babbled on and on and had some slight improvements, but wouldn’t call this an actual “solution”. I don’t like adding negative comments so I feel bad writing this. This video however frustrated the hell out of me. And YES, I own an R5C.
I’m sorry the video wasn’t up to your expectations. I’ll endeavour to do better with future ones, and babble on less.
If you have a lot of shadow in the scenes you have to use regular C LOG because C LOG 3 is to noisy in the shadow area.
Unfortunately no C Log 1 on the R5 C :(
@@NaikMedia I didn’t know that. I use the R5 and that’s my way around the clog 3 noise. Canon really should give everyone clog 2 it doesn’t make sense to limit it in this way
it's very odd isn't it - even Sony give all their cameras all the profiles, even if they probably won't perform the best on that system. Having the choice is better and let the responsibility be on us, right?@@Ingmusicgroup
Do you think FW 1.0.3.1 will fix this issue?
Hey! I talk about it in this video =)
ruclips.net/video/oXtihVNo-eQ/видео.html
Dude I can’t see any noise on youtube! I would like to know how the noise reduction effects detailed underexposed areas. Like dark trees and leaves
Hey, check the description - there’s - link to download the footage to see it properly. If you use Neatvideo the noise is cleared up very nicely but it kills your processor!
How are you able to shoot video on r5c with a sigma lens?
Thanks for the question :) I’m using RF/EF adapters from Canon. They autofocus perfectly and add extra functionality such as ND and adjustment ring. I have some RF lenses from Canon but they tend to be for certain uses only, while the Sigmas pretty much live on the cameras. Ad
@NaikMedia I have the Canon adapter mieke adapter with the nd filter in it and they both don't work on my Tamrons 24-70mm &45mm
@@drkjedi28 That's very odd, sorry to hear they don't work for you. The Sigmas work great on both the Canon Variable ND and the Canon Control Ring adapter on my cameras, never tried a Tamron lens however. Ad
NOISE - User error. The camera has super effective noise reduction. You are using bad setting in the menu.
Non-sharp photos - It's not lags of IBIS. Sharp photos you get thanks AF and correct shutter time. You probably do something wrong. Portraits from R5C are excellently sharp. In photography you need IBIS when you go down 1/100 shutter time. In most situation I shoot 1/250 and more.
Noise - bad when underexposed. I go into how to fix it in other videos. It’s still bad compared to other cameras and much more noticeable than other cinema cameras due to the pattern and red colouring. Not everyone wants to use in camera NR, and I mention NR in post (which most professionals prefer).
Sharpness - I mention events, the lack of ibis makes the 45mp photos less sharp due to movement. Yes, 1/250th will fix it *at certain focal lengths*. It’s useful for anyone looking to change from an R5 or other IBIS camera to this one to know this shortcoming, so it’s worth mentioning. It will never be as sharp as R5 in certain scenarios, despite being almost the same camera.
Thanks for helping clarify to other viewers!
I own the canon r5c. in cinema mode 59,94Hz I get the warning invalid operation when I press the record(10) button. Does anybody know what I am doing wrong or missing as canon itself isn't helping me out?
Hi GM, can you elaborate on what you mean when you say ‘Cinema mode’, not sure what you mean by that :) Ad
@@NaikMedia video mode not photo mode
Thanks for clarifying - I’ll take a look, but if anybody reading this knows the issue please do say! Ad
If you’re trying to record Xf-avc in 59.94hz it won’t work. First make sure button 10 is setup as a record button or use the red shutter button. Push the #3(disp) button until you get to the screen with the most info on it. In the top left corner is a symbol for SD card and if it’s red then it means something isn’t set right. When it’s green it’s ready to record. Either switch to RAW LT, RAW ST or an MP4 setting or switch the system frequency to 50 or 24hz. I use 24 as that’s the Hollywood standard. If any of that still doesn’t work then it could be a slow or broken SD card. At minimum you need a V60 card to do 4k. Better is a V90 card and better yet and I recommend spending the money on a CF express B card. Most likely is that you’re trying to record xlr-avc on 59.94hz setting. Also make sure to initialize the card.
Wow! Wormhole331 to the rescue. Thanks for the comprehensive response :) let us know if it works for you GM! Ad
I have a huge issue with my R5 doing this even with photos. My subject will be fine but the background is horrifically noisy.
That sounds very weird. Might be worth contacting Canon about it.
The only reason I could think of that happening with photos is the camera cranking up the iso or putting on some effect (without your instruction).
Perhaps a factory reset or firmware update might knock it back in line.
I think thats all canon cameras the noise is just there in the shadows
Aye, it’s C Log 3 by the looks of it.
The problem is hobbyists now have access to professional tools and worse can’t be bothered to read manuals. While RUclips videos can be useful it’s made many unable to think or help themselves with basic stuff. You haven’t solved anything you’ve just used the tools provided by the camera
I’m not a fan of dismissive comments like this. We’re a community - amateur or pro, we should help each other. That’s what this video set out to do: help people who made the same mistakes as me. I solved an issue I faced, even if it was borne from my own ignorance, hence the title.
Some people read manuals, others experiment and try things out; the latter is how I learn in particular.
ABB?
*Automatic Black Balance
@@NaikMediaI wasn’t aware of any noise issue
Rubidium from Crimson Engine uses the same workaround ruclips.net/video/OLD6OdqzKmQ/видео.html
Thanks Mr Zen, I hadn’t seen that; good to know I’m talking some sense! He does recommend having iso below the base for a cleaner image and lower dynamic range, but shooting 3200 @ base 3200 should give you both cleaner images and the full dynamic range of the sensor. I’ll try test it to see. Ad
If people had real experience shooting film, they would know how to handle noise in their shadow areas...
I have to disagree. We’re well into an era of high quality digital media, and people should adapt to, learn and manage this new medium as best they can.
Prior knowledge of an obsolete medium is not essential.
@@NaikMedia you can disagree, but my statement still holds true. wheather you're tightening your grain in film or decreasing your noise in digital, the basic principles of lighting and photography still appy. prior knowledge of anything is essentail as it is the foundation of what comes later. we have newer building materials than we had 30 years ago, yet the basic principles of construction and architecture still apply if you want to keep a house or building from falling down. to reject founding priciples is simply foolish. i can only speak for myself, but i'm sure there are those out there with film backgrounds that found that moving from film to digital wasn't that difficult. the understanding of the basic principles we learned from film are more than relevant today and can relieve many a headache with something as simple as dealing with noise. oh, and if film is such an "obsolete" medium, why are people killing themselves to get that "film Look" with their digital cameras?
best to you.
Thanks for the detailed reply Scott :) My response might have seemed curt but it was more aimed at someone who might be new to video, see your comment and find your assertion on film diminishing to their aspirations, or even have them spend a lot of money trying to achieve what you suggest when it’s not completely necessary.
Having the knowledge of film (and therefore the impact on light on a light sensitive medium) will no doubt be of great benefit to film makers, however I wouldn’t consider it vital to be great at achieving a good image in the age of digital. Understanding light and its sculpting is the most important aspect in my mind and it holds true for both media. As do the fundamentals of framing, blocking etc
There is definitely a great boost to skill and creativity that comes from necessity/restriction (the kind that film brings), but I’d hate for newbies to be disparaged because they were simply born too late to use it :)
And I think people wanting to get the film look is a case of nostalgia, and rose tinted specs. The same as we see with vinyl records. It’s fossils like us wishing for the old days, and youngsters wishing to stand out from the crowd. I think we glorify things too much these days (eg filmic look, dynamic range, grain) because it’s easier than developing our skills. I’m definitely guilty of this.
My thoughts anyway :) I really do appreciate your comments in any case.
14 min of this video is useless hahah the usefull info is about 2 min...
Glad you found 2min useful! 🙌🏻
this camera is a pos compared to the R5. Im really regretting buying it. They should've called it something else it really has nothing to do with the R5 which has more features and is a much better camera imo
Thanks for your opinion and comment =) I think it comes down to your needs. For my uses this surpasses the R5 in almost every way. The only thing I miss is the IBIS in photo mode, but it's something that can ruin video footage which I shoot more than photos, so it's a compromise I'm happy to make.
I'd recommend getting more acquainted with the video benefits and you'll see that the video quality is way beyond that of the R5 (e.g. extended dynamic range, better colour and falloff). Check out Josh Sattin's videos on how to properly expose C Log 3 - when I learned this properly the video footage just went to the next level.
Hopefully the regret fades, and you start enjoying it more. It's a powerhouse for content creation. Cheers!
@@NaikMedia i just filmed with it today and autofocus disables, goes gray when I switched to slow motion. All my footage is out of focus. I kept on having to manually dial in exposure settings when switching back and forth from slow mo to real time while the client stood there waiting on me because there’s no custom modes. Idk bro i hate it. You want to buy mine?
@@allinthemind2006 What lens are you using for the S&F mode? EF-S lenses don't autofocus in S&F mode, or have limited focus options. You really should be punching in to check focus in any case for best practice, this has saved me many times and isn't an option on the R5 (while recording).
When your shutter is set to angle rather than speed, the camera will automatically adjust the shutter speed to 2x that of the frame-rate - so if you're filming in 50p and switch to 100p, then your shutter speed is automatically changed from 1/100 to 1/200 (if using a 180º shutter angle). Turn shutter to speed if you don't want the exposure to change, but you'll have jittery footage. Or put iso settings into auto. Or assign one of the buttons to S&F shooting (that's what I do, but I still have to raise the iso as it darkens the shot).
Custom modes might help, I don't know. You know in the end what camera works for you best.
How much would you like for your R5C?
Thanks for the advice! Im using the RF 24-70. I realized yesterday that autofocus actually works only in 60fps s&f. Before i was in 72fps. At least it works now. Im gonna give it one more go but if you’re serious I may sell it to you. Probably will want 3200 if you’re interested. it’s pretty much brand new and i just payed full price for it from B&H. Im gonna play with the CLog 3 maybe it will inspire me
@@allinthemind2006 Glad to hear the AF is working now! =)
If you're in the US then I'd recommend finding a seller there - shipping to the UK is easier said than done sometimes!