Aperture numbers explained - THE SCIENCE behind the aperture, "f" and why the numbers make sense
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 มิ.ย. 2020
- Aperture numbers are confusing to most photographers. But the reality is: they make sense and there is a reason for them.
Wolf Amri explains how aperture numbers are calculated, why that knowledge is important in photography and will clear all mysteries regarding aperture in general.
In this tech talk chapter of our photography course, we offer insights that will help beginners to even the most advanced photographers. The science behind aperture might sound a bit confusing at first sight, but it helps understanding photography.
----- Product Links -----
Check out OUR OWN photography shirts shop:
shop.spreadshirt.com/photogra...
----- Find Wolf Amri on Social Media -----
www.photo1x1.com
/ photographybeginnersgroup
/ free.photography.course
----- Gear used to shoot this video -----
Camera: amzn.to/3et7TsL
Lens: amzn.to/2NjTaoe
Tripod: amzn.to/2V7Xhb1
Sound Recorder: amzn.to/3g2HB19 - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
This is the clearest explanation I’ve ever heard. Thank you!
Thanks, Michael 🙏
Hands down the best photography tutorials on youtube.The best!
🤗🙏🤗 Thanks so much!
I just found your channel and I've been watching every single video, you make things so easy to understand "the more you master a skill the easier you can teach others"
Thank you so much 🙏🙏. I have to admit, I research a lot before I do these videos. Some things I know and some things I learn while creating the videos 😉.
and for those who do not hate maths : 2.8 ≅ 2 x √2 , 5.6 ≅ 2.8 x √2 = 2 x √2 x √2 = 2.8 x 2 ... etc ... ( √2 ≅ 1.4 )
Exactly! ❤
Absolutely the best. I saw so many videos that were the "basics" of aperture. I wanted the science of the aperture to fully understand it.
Thanks, great to hear it was helpful 🙏🙏
For all these years I thought the f number was just a number somebody had chosen. Never guessed it had relation to the focal length. Thanks for showing me the light :-)
Great to know some people appreciate the “science” behind aperture, Kim. Thanks for your feedback 🙏🙏.
Just subscribed to your channel. Here is why:
- You are explaining things CLEARLY, and you are not rushing and jump-cutting video like 99% of other TH-camrs
- You clearly KNOW the subject well enough to be explaining.
- You are correct and go for FACTS
- You have clearly taken time to create MEANINGFUL illustrations
- You have a PASSION for what you are doing
- Your English is not the best in the world (but above average), but you are not going uh... ahh.. eh... You have a script and you are sticking to it, which makes it easier to follow.
Thanks for your subscription and the motivating words 🤗🙏🙏
This is just brilliant explanation. Maths made easy, interesting and relevant for photography.
Thank you! Glad it was interesting!
This is what we get when a pro photographer has become a good teacher...! super awesome.. Got it. thanks
🙏🙏 Thank you 🤗
Thank you. f=focal length. Most people, including pros, don't understand these simple facts. I see and hear so many try to explain aperture without understanding that its just a ratio.
So true. That’s the case with so many things in photography 😬.
Have been looking for this for so long. And finally got the explanation. Thanks!
Thanks for your feedback, Jitendra. Great to hear it was helpful!
Wow. I was searching for this info, but it's hardly available in as easy a lecture as you explained. Simply wow. I'm really grateful to you for providing such a quality content. I'll sub and share. God bless you sir.
Thank you! I really appreciate that 😉
Very clear & useful information. Thanks Wolf for such an educational video.
Thanks for your nice feedback, Sanjay 🙏🙏
Totally subscribed. Speaking my language of understanding a subject and as a new (analog) photographer without having taken a photo this helps greatly when choosing lenses for my use!
Hey Collin. Thanks, that’s great to hear. Appreciate your sub 😉.
Straight and simple explanation
Thank you 🙏 🙏🙏
I do not want to watch your videos without subscribing your channel even after watching this video. I gave a stop to those f-stops and hit the subscribe button.
Thanks, Sharath 🙏🙏🙏
This is an excellent explanation! Now I understand why the aperture decreases with most zoom lenses… it’s not the aperture itself changing, it’s the relation to the focal length. Thank you! 👍🏻
Thank you for your feedback, great to hear that it was helpful 😉
thank you, your videos are very simple and helpful.
Thanks! Glad you like them!
Love your videos - whilst I have always known the sequence of f stops and their effect on light I have never really understood how the actual f numbers are generated !
Thanks, Peter. That's more a niche video. Great to hear it is useful to a handful of people ;).
Love it! Thanks!
Thank YOU, Jeremiah!
This is by far the best video explaining how f numbers works! Thanks you ❤
Thank you, that's so great to hear🤗🤗
Superuseful and superclear. Thanks!
Thank you, Pablo 🙏
Best explanation found for F stops and easily understood why bigger f number give smaller hole and vice versa. Great.🙏🙏🙏🙏
Thanks, Ravi 🙏🙏🙏
Excellent videos !!! I will let others know about this site
Thanks a lot, Guido. Much appreciated 🙏🙏🙏
Excellent thank you. I have just subscribed.
Thank you so much! And a happy new year! ;)
This is extraordinary. Thank you
Thank YOU 🤗😉
amazing video
New knowledge
thank you 😊
Thank you 🙏🙏
Brilliant... thank you very much..
Thank YOU 😉
Nice one Wolf! Love maths! Love the explanation 😀
Thanks! I started loving maths once I left school 😂
Your videos are excellent. New subscriber!
I hope this isn't a silly question, but are aperature numbers calculated exactly the same for MFT cameras? Thank you!
Thanks, Aaron. No silly questions 😉. Essentially yes. It's all about the aperture opening relative to the focal length.
@@wolfamri Thanks!!
So 3 toggles is a full stop of light. Same for shutter speed and ISO. Great to finally know why!!!
Thanks, Nate. I see you are calling that "toggles". Since English is not my native language, I called it clicks. Would toggle be a better word? I ask because I'm currently working on a new video (photography explained in 60min) and I use that term quite a bit.
On a side note: if you haven't seen it, here is a link where I talk about these clicks a bit in regard to manual exposure: th-cam.com/video/rcqUnctVZ-o/w-d-xo.html
Thanks again, much appreciated!
There's no need to comment on the quality of your teaching once again because it's superb as always.
I actual wanted to ask if English is your first or second language. I enjoy your choice of words. The topic is dry but "instead of turning off, I recommend you watch it twice. " I'm going to steal that and find some teaching opportunity to use it!
Thank you so much, Greg 🤗🤗. No, English is not my first language. I’m Austrian and usually speak german 😉.
@@wolfamri I can only imagine how good your German is!
Danke! This is seriously valuable!
Great to hear that, Paul. Danke 😉. It serves a pretty small target group, but I though it has to be clarified 😁
Good explanation from the confusing maths.
Thank you🙏🤗
Thank you, Mr Edward Norton
At 2:48 I had a flashback to college math and went, "Oh! Yeah this makes sense, but is really annoying"
😆 I can totally relate. I only started enjoying maths when I left school and wanted to learn instead of having to learn 🤣.
So helpful thanks
Thank you, Tasabeeh!
You rock man! Grazie
Thank you, Ihab 🙏😉
New subscriber here. Thank you for video. Greetings from Greece.
Thank you so much! I hope you have better weather in the south 😉
Purest form of explanation. I am just recalling my optics classes of college days. truly amazing 💗
Thanks, Edd. Back then it didn’t even interest me 😂
Very true Amri, the real essence of photography 📸 is when we grip the camera in hand and play with the magical effects of lenses.
Mr.Wolf Amri, Simple very nice tutorials explanation , my opinion your world best faculty on you tube , your not wolf your a LION amti,thank you SN Singh from bangalore,India
Thank you very much! All the best to Bangalore from Vienna!
I really2 appreciated with your tutorial !
I Saute You.
Thank you!!!
Your videos are very useful
Thank you, Indra 🙏🙏
@@wolfamri 🙏🙏
Thank you professor
😂 my pleasure
very informative
Thank you 🙏🙏
No Views, no likes? What an honour to get this exclusive link! 😅 You could also discuss what that mean if you mount and f.E. F4 lens to FF or aps-c... I got so many questions and discussion about that topic...😅, maybe in a nother video?;)
Haha, I didn't expect too many views. In fact there are more than expected 🤣. Unfortunately most people are not really interested in the theory behind photography. But I felt it could help those with a bigger technical interest to understand what aperture numbers are all about.
Regarding your question: do you mean in regard to depth of focus, or do you have people asking if the light is the same? I didn't get that question yet to be honest.
@@wolfamri I also have a similar question. Do we really lose a stop of light when mounting FF lens to APS-C body. Shouldn't the T-stop of the lens remain the same, regardless of sensor size ? I get that the light gathering capability of a smaller sensor would be less.
There is a lot of misunderstanding in this regard in the web. Partly because of the calculators (e.g. also depth of field calculators) only respect sensor size, not resolution.
In fact the absolutely same amount of light will hit every square mm, inch or whatever, because nothing really changes. The camera just crops out a part of the image - same as you could do yourself in photoshop.
But if you use the same resolution sensor both for full frame and for crop, as you say, the size for each pixel will be different and therefore gather less light. I hope that makes sense ;)
@@wolfamri Thanks for the clarification. So, it all comes down to pixel density.
Does that mean a low resolution APSC sensor should perform similar to a high resolution FF sensor, given they both use same sensor technology ?
@@cooljoan1309 yes. Same sensor and camera technology, same pixel size, same image. You can shoot crop with many full frame cameras.
Merci!
De rien 🤗😉
Grate info. I'm new to shooting and i'm looking for a new canon t7i a starter camera. I can't find the link to chang the focal lenghts, aperature Exc.
Hi David. Thanks. That was a pretty tough video to start your photography journey, I have a lot easier ones 😉. Regarding your question: you have to leave auto mode to be able to do that. It will work in Tv Av and M (the big dial on top of your camera). Maybe have a look at this playlist that will help you understand all that: th-cam.com/play/PL7W5udALs-AlIByQQ8KnleHQdKq_9m0vD.html
Hi Wolf. Once again a fantastic video, thank you. Do you have a link to the exposure bar cheat sheet please?
Thanks, Christian! I’m not on the computer. But I’ll check tomorrow!
@@wolfamri Hi Wolf. Sorry to be a pain. Wondered if you had found the link to the cheat sheet, this would be very helpful to print off and keep for reference. Thank you.
@@The_Boycie I've been trying to get ahold of it as well ...
So if i reduced the aperture from f4 to f2.8, should i have to double the iso to get the same amount of light? Is it right?
Yes and no 😉. In regard to image brightness, yes. But ISO is the gain and has nothing to do with light. You would have to double the exposure time to get the same amount of light. ISO will only artificially brighten the image. 😉
thanks sir after this video i cleared my concept about this topic before this i was so confused that what is aperture number
Thank you for your feedback, Muhsin. 🙏
Wonderful 🙏
Thank you 🙏🙏
@@wolfamri I really appreciate the way you are explaining sir . Keep going sir
🙏
Thank you, I really appreciate your feedback 🤗🤗
BTW: in case you want to learn even more about aperture, I lately created a website with lots of animations that are not yet in one of my videos: exposure-triangle.com/aperture-explained/
Hello Wolf! So, for example, i have a zoom lens 70-200 f/4. When I use f70, my aperture diameter would be 70/4 = 17.5 Does it mean that when I use f200, I should choose the aperture number 11 (200/17.5) to reach the same diameter therefore the same brightness. Or that's not correct?))
Hi Konstantin. I’m afraid no, it’s the relative opening that counts, and f-number names that relation. So the f-number is always responsible for the brightness.
@@wolfamri got it, thank you!
I have an interesting observation to make:
Two different Yashica lenses, both 45mm focal lenght, BUT one reaches f2.8 and the other f1.7. The glasses of the f1.7 have bigger diameter. Now the question: both lenses use exact same Copal diaphragm , same diameter. How ? Why?
Hi. How do you measure the same diameter of the aperture? It may look as if they have the same, but in fact internally it is different.
@@wolfamri I can assure you the mechanisms are the same , as strange as it sounds. I am talking about the Yashica Minister D (f2.8) in comparison to Yashica Minister 700 (f1.7)
Great explainer video! What is an f/0.95 lens then? Like, for example, the Brightin Star 35mm F0.95 for APS-C.
Thank you 😉. For auch a lens the diameter of the aperture is bigger than the focal length. 35mm/0.95=36.84mm.
There are basically two reasons: to get as much light into the camera as possible for low light situations and to create a more shallow depth of focus (e.g. for portraits).
This channel must have million subscribers. Thank you for the tutorials Sire
🤗🤗 Thanks for watching and your feedback 🙏🙏
Each f number is the previous f number multiply by the square root of 2. That is how f/1 gets to f/1.4, then 2, then 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, etc. Just keep on multiplying the square root of 2 to get to the next full f stop.
Totally correct. But multiplying by the square root of 2 is something most people have issues with. That’s why I thought it is easier to multiply every second f-number by two 😉
If I have understood correctly, the amount of light depends on the area of the opened circle in the Aperture wheel. Since "f" stands for Focal length, the amount of light that enters the camera should ideally be more if the value of "f" goes higher. For example, the area for f/4 at 100mm (diameter 25 mm, so radius is 12.5 mm. 3.14 * 12.5 * 12.5) is 490.625 sq mm and the same for f/4 200mm (diameter 50, so radius is 25 mm. 3.14 * 25 * 25) it becomes 1963 sq mm. Is this correct?
Hey Subrata. Great question! That is theoretically correct, but I’m afraid with a longer focal length you lose light through the length of the tube. So in the end f/4 will always let the same amount of light to your sensor no matter what focal length. I hope that makes sense.
A lens with longer focal length has smaller angle of view so it naturally gathers less light. The fact that the aperture gets larger with the same aperture value compensates thing.
So a Voigtlander F0.95 makes the image brighter than posible somehow?
Yes, in a nutshell it bundles light, similar to what you do when you want to start a fire with a magnifying glass.
Can you please explain why the image on sensor do not get smaller when you stopping down aperture or making hole smaller?
That’s hard to explain in words only, Mario. I’m working on a website with animations that will be published soon. It’s physics. As a mnemonic: when you close the blinds of a window, the complete room still gets light, it just becomes darker. It’s a bit different with optical glass rather than window glass, but it should give you an idea.
@@wolfamri I imagine that something moving inside lens to project the same picture one the sensor. If you close the opening of the lens in from or in the back, you will get the smaller and smaller visible hole.
But if you do that inside the lens only change is exposure and DOF.
In a way yes, Mario. The projection of light rays plays a big part. They arrive at the lens in parallel bundles and are then diverged ti a point. By cutting away the outer rays, you don’t cut away a part of the image, but just a few rays so it will get darker. I hope that makes any sense at all.
@@wolfamri I am sure you will make great animation or experiment to explain us exactly. :)
Tnx..
I'm giving an introductory photography course to my colleagues, and I hope you don't mind if I refer them to your invaluable videos and website and yeah few subscribers. Thanks
Quite the contrary, my friend! Thank you for your support🙏😘
Hey! This is a very good explanation about it but a question comes to my mind.. Does this mean that larger zooms (more mm) are going to be brighter than other zooms at the same f stop number?
If I calculate a 50mm/1,8, it tells me that the aperture diameter is 27,77 and a 85mm/1,8's diameter is 47.. So.. Is the 85mm going to be much brighter than the 50mm, right?
Thank you! I‘m afraid no. Both are equally bright. The focal length also plays a part in this equation. The longer the lens (the tube if you want) the more light is lost (like the deeper you go into a tunnel, the darker it gets 😉).
Thanks for clarifying! I just thought I was discovering a hidden truth haha@@wolfamri
@AgustinNielsen 😂 trust me, I know how that feels. 😅
The explanation presented here is simplified and not entirely accurate. The f-number is not actually about the physical diameter of the aperture, but the diameter of the optical image of the aperture, also known as the entrance pupil. That is affected by the focal length (which you can see by looking at the diaphragm through the front of the lens and changing the focal length). As the focal length increases, so does the diameter of the entrance pupil (the aperture will appear larger even though its physical diameter won't change), but the field of view will be narrower, so the brightness will remain the same.
Alot of f words going on here. Great video explaining it
Thank you! 🙏
Good video! Actually though this is not "all" the math relating to f-stops.
The progression of f-stops brings up a mathematical proportion that is not always as well known as the formula for the area or circumference of a circle.
This is the ratio of change between a circle's diameter and its area, and the constant is the square root of 2; ( √2). Multiply a circle's radius by √2 (which is about 1.4) and you will double its area. Reduce it by the same factor and you will get half the area. This defines the progression 2 x 1.4 = 2.8 x 1.4 = 4 etc etc. These numbers are not approximate - if you get 3.9 instead of 4, it is because 1.4 is a rounded approximation of √2. Use √2 and the numbers will be exact. This also explains why the f-stop numbers double every two stops, because after all root of 2 squared is, well 2.
The adoption of these ratios allows reciprocity - change the f-stop by one value, and the exposure time by one value in the opposite direction, and the expopsure is the same. By expressing it as a ratio to the focal length of the lens, the optical magnifaction is taken into account, such that f/2 or 4 or whatever will be exactly the same light throughput on any lens, of any focal length.
It's always great to find good engineering from a bygone era, when the inventors, had they been a little more in haste or a little less curious could have stuck us with a meaningless system of arbitrary values: 1,2,3 etc, which would be impossible to translate accurately from one lens to another or one situation to the next.
Thank you for your feedback, Greg. I thought I explained that in my video 🤔.
@@wolfamri You did! And I'm not criticizing - you just stopped short of naming "the thing", and that is √2.
NO worries, I hope I didn't come across as self-defending or rude. I guess I need to rewatch my video - it's been a while 😆. Thanks again!
I love your videos but I'm absolutely terrible at any kind of math ( diagnosed dyscalculia) and I've watched this over and over and none of it makes a bit of sense to me on the math stuff, thank goodness for viewscreens
No worries at all, nobody ever really does the maths 😉.
@@wolfamri lol thank goodness for that, I find it so difficult when it comes to understanding the math,
i think im stupid.... i dont get it. are there any pictures to show samples?
This is a very technical video, that I did on request, so don’t worry if you don’t understand. I do have a comparison tool with sample images that might help you. www.photo1x1.com/portrait-lens-comparison-tool there is also a link there in the menu with easier to understand aperture videos. I hope that helps 😉
Start from 1 and double and double ... 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, .... so any number in the series is half the next number and double the previous number. These are related to the area of the aperture - double the area we get twice as much light, half the area we get half the amount of light
Now take the square root of these numbers we get something related to the diameter of the aperture. They are approximately, 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22. Recognize that series?
While that is correct, I have to admit that I needed to read that four times to understand. I think that is a problem with a lot of things in education. Abstracting too much doesn’t necessarily help understanding. That’s why I try to explain things rather in-depth 😉.
Totally lost me during the maths part. But I believe you.
Thanks for your trust 😉. It is a bit much. But I did it on request 😉
Sir its little confusing but its good
Thanks! Yes it‘s advanced info about aperture, but I thought it might help some with understanding what the numbers stand for. Maybe watching a second time helps if you really want to understand them.
That means Canon 200mm f2 lens has 100mm or 10cm diameter. Even the camera does not have 10cm size. Amount of light is measured in T stops i think
Oh yes, it does 😉. The 200mm f/2 has a diameter of 128mm. That lens is humongous, so that is correct 😉. But you are right too, the actual transmission of the light (reduced by the transmission of different types of glass, etc.) is measured by t-stops. The difference to f-stops is really small though.
I LOVE to learn with your videos. But math? No thanks. Not my strongest suit. I was lost during the entire video. But thanks for posting. I know a lot of people loved to learn about aperture this way.
😂 Thanks anyway, I really appreciate that 🤗😉
Oh... and when will you enrich our lifes with your macro skills?
🤣🤣 it won't be my skills. There are definitely people with better skills - do you know that Jens from "Another Perspective" 😉.
The video I planned about the available macro options didn't work out with my first subject, so I need to change the subjects.
I watched this video and I am interested but I'll also be honest - for some people "like me", I'll need to watch it a few more times to get all the numbers down. To understand this video will matter which education level the person has and whether they're willing to put any effort in - like most things. - or - if you're willing to watch it more than twice, or more than four times - or as many times as it takes is key
Sincerity to a passion or desire is the key to who will and won't put the effort in. Thank you, Wolf, for all the effort you put in for us.
Thank you, Jo. In fact that would be 8th grade. Most of us went through this. But we went through so much in school, that we forgot most. Which is in fact pretty sad. I only enjoyed maths once I left school and I bet most of us would love it if we would learn because we want to know rather than doing it for exams.
That is a clear math but how it works with different physical size of the lens. If I take another 100mm lens, that is more compact, more “pocketable size”, lets say 1/2 the size, all the diameters will be also physically 1/2 the size, that means half the light. Yet, they will still able to achieve 1.8, 2, 2.8 aperture. How?
Thank you. I’m afraid there is no lens at half the size that has the same max. aperture than the “full size”. Yes, they are indeed getting a bit smaller, but focal length is no physical length. You will see rather humongous 35mm f/1.4 prime lenses and rather compact 24-70mm f/2.8 zooms. Beside the fact that f/2.8 is 1/4 of the diameter of f/1.4, the focal length doesn’t really determine the length of the lens. Not sure if that helps answering your question, but at least I hope so 😁.
@@wolfamri Thank you for taking the time Wolf. I should probably clarify my question better. When you take into consideration 24-70 on full frame and lets say on micro 4/3 camera they will have different physical size. Still, both of them will be constant f/2.8. Now for FF the lens will be named as 24-70mm but on micro 4/3 it will be named 16-45mm for example. That is because focal length is being downsized in comparison to the full frame sensor. But aperture is not downsized. But if the aperture is physically smaller on micro 4/3 lens comparing to the FF lens, then the aperture should be 3.6 or 4 or the correct equivalent. Yet, if I take the same portrait with FF lens and with Micro Lens at that marked 2.8 aperture, I will get the same bokeh/depth of field. That means the same amount of light went through the lens, despite the fact, that the aperture in the micro lens was physically smaller. How is that possible, if the math is right?
It’s really a different focal length. The equivalent focal length is just „calculated“ to get the same angle of view. That explains the difference in size 😉.
@@wolfamri Of course. It is simply a different focal lens. The comparison with FF does not affect the math while counting the real much shorter focal length. I am stupid. Thank you wolf. :) It clicked in.
My pleasure. Sometimes I too need to think about various things. Photography terms are so confusing. Equivalent focal length, exposure triangle, shutter speed, ISO... totally weird and partly wrong terms that one easily gets confused. 😂
Interesting BUT the actual numbers are very unimportant.
Understanding what’s going on is never a mistake 😉. They told us in school, but I didn’t believe it back then 😁.
There's no way every pro or amateur photographer knows these calculations or how to calculate it! Im completely lost, and im useless at math!
Don't worry, hardly anyone knows that. But there have been the one or the other question in the past, so I thought I'll do a video about that. Everybody has different strengths - for some it's math, for others it's photography, again for others,... 😉. My strength is doing weird videos with useless knowledge 😂
@@wolfamri Thanks for replying. Your videos are great. Maybe you could do a simplified version of this video for idiots like me! An easy way of figuring it out, the exposure triangle, and maybe one that would help people decide which lens to buy, and why.
@reflux043 these videos are currently in the making 😉. It will take a bit more time to finish them though 😬
@@wolfamri No problem. Ive subscribed anyway.
@reflux043 Thank you, much appreciated 🤗
Happy Pi Day btw
😂😂😂 is it really. Happy Pi Day 😂😂
Anyone else confused
Sorry to confuse you! I did this on request to show what the numbers are all about. If you are rather new to photography, this is probably the worst aperture video to watch 😬. I have a series about aperture - this is the most basic one th-cam.com/video/xgNAX-hKPU0/w-d-xo.html
AAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! NUMBERS!!!!!!!
😂 sorry 😂
@@wolfamri lol. I like maths, but it doesn't like me. Somehow my brain shuts down when it has to count. I think I'm number-phobic. Interesting video though ;)
Thank you! I learned to like maths way after I left school. So I totally understand that 🤣
this was too much information!!!
I expected it might be too much for quite a few people. But I love to make people understand the background and science behind photography. In the longrun that will help you understand your hobby much better. Maybe watching a second time will help.
@@wolfamri can i send multiple entries for photo critique? I have two favourite photos of mine to share with you. I want to show you what I have learned so far from you as a thank you.
You lost me at math..... lol
🤣 sorry. I did that on special request. There are other videos that explain it much easier.
@@wolfamri Ok awesome I will check those out, I haven't done match in 25 years