Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: Time for some clarity on progressive technology...

  1. #1
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386

    Time for some clarity on progressive technology...

    Ok, things are moving faster than I can keep up with. Can we start a thread that overviews the basics of the changes going on in the progressive world?

    Topics:
    1.) Back surface progressives
    1a.) Full progression on back surface
    1b.) Part on front, part on back
    2.) Individualized progressives
    3.) Wavefront-corrected progressives
    3a.) Corrected for wearer's abberations
    3b.) Corrected for lens' abberations.
    4.) Freeform progressives

    Let's start with #1.
    Last edited by drk; 01-12-2006 at 03:00 PM.

  2. #2
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Back surface progressives: (please help me edit this, as it is not a research paper, but a community effort.)

    The idea, I believe, is that if the progressive zone is closer to the eye, the field of view will be larger.

    But the problem is that the sphere and cylinder power cannot be placed on the front surface (for various adaptation reasons), so the progressive curves and the sphero-cylinder curves have to be cut simultaneously.

    Examples of all on back design: Proceed Internal from Seiko. Multigressive from Rodenstock.

    Examples of front and back progression: Definity.
    Last edited by drk; 01-12-2006 at 09:51 AM.

  3. #3
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Individualized progressives: (Help me out, here)

    Since with back surface progressives, you are cutting unique surfaces, then you might as well vary the parameters to create a specific lens.

    Examples:
    *insets can be more/less depending on distance pd and prismatic power of lens
    *distribution of unwanted astigmatism can be maximized for each add power
    *design can be maximized for specified vertex distance, or pantoscopic tilt, or even frame wrap ("position of wear")
    *design can somehow utilize information about head and eye movements (harder or softer, shorter or longer corridor, etc.)
    *design can take into account fitting height being used

    This requires a free-form, or 3-axis generator.
    The customization occurs on back (and front?) of lens.
    This process saves labs from having to stock many lens types.

    Some free-form designs utilize "generic" data, and others require "patient-specific" data from various in-office measuring devices.
    Ipseo: patient specific
    Gradal Individual: patient specific
    Shamir Autograph:?
    Sola One HD: generic population data?

    It seems as though the input of these patient-specific data guides some software that maximizes some effects and minimizes others to achieve best effect. It's almost as though there is a computer analyzing data, and then spitting out the best design, not unlike what seasoned dispensers try to do when choosing between "pre-made" designs.

    The upshot should be that, on the whole, the patient population should get better vision more consistently by virtue of "automatic design matching".
    Last edited by drk; 01-12-2006 at 09:57 AM.

  4. #4
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Wavefront corrected progressives:

    Corrected for wearer's higher order aberrations:
    The Z-View from Ophthonics is the only one in this category that I'm aware of, and it's SV only, I believe.

    Corrected for lens's higher-order aberrations:
    I'll cut and paste from James Sheedy, O.D.'s newsletter:


    NEWS

    ESSILOR DEBUTS WAVEFRONT-CORRECTED SPECTACLE LENS
    Essilor of America has announced the launch of two new lenses, Varilux Physio and Varilux Physio 360°, which use wavefront technology to reduce or eliminate higher order aberrations found on the progressive lens surface. The Wavefront Advanced Vision Enhancement (WAVE) technology used to create the lenses has three components: wavefront instrumentation to measure the lens wavefront and reduce lens-induced higher order aberration; a patented calculation engine to optimize lens design; and 360° Digital Surfacing, which is used to create lens molds and back surface curves with the level of precision necessary to correct minute wavefront errors. According to Essilor, 360° Digital Surfacing allows creation of a complex surface with accuracy to 0.1 microns. Both the Varilux Physio and Varilux Physio 360° feature a wavefront-enhanced front surface. The Varilux Physio 360° also features a digitally surfaced back side customized to complement the front surface. Essilor claims that the
    new technology will, for the first time, reduce previously uncorrectable higher order aberrations inherent in progressive lens designs and provide enhanced vision at all distances and light levels.

    EDITOR’S NOTE: In this application, Essilor uses wavefront technology to correct the higher order aberration inherent in all prior progressive lenses. This should not be confused with another technology that is used by Ophthonix, Inc. to produce iZon wavefront guided lenses. The iZon product uses wavefront technology to measure patient’s vision and aims to correct higher order aberrations in the patient’s own eye. Ophthonix’s first product to come on the market is a single vision lens.




    This one has me stumped. I understand that spherical aberration is inheirent in all lenses, as well as chromatic abb., coma, curvature of field, etc. (the seven Seidel aberrations). Are these being referred to as "higher order"? From refractive surgery technology, we also discuss "trefoil, quadrifoil, etc.", which are esoteric names for esoteric types of blur, essentially. Are we to assume that ophthalmic lenses also have such aberrations? Or, are we simply talking about the main issue, which is spherical aberration?

    I think it's going to be important to understand the degree to which these aberrations are affecting patients, first, before we buy into the brave-new-world marketing hype that is, essentially, way over the top of most of our heads. We are probably talking a tenth of a diopter, here!

    My cynical position tells me that, until proven otherwise, wavefront correction in spectacle lenses can be rendered useless by real-world factors, such as:
    1.) Even minimally incorrect glazing
    2.) Variation in position of wear from frames' flexibility, or lack of perfect adjustment ("registration issues")

    I also worry that a -0.25D surfacing error, or minimal, minimal refracting error, or even an oldster's naturally increasing internal higher-order-abberations may make the whole wavefront aspect of Varilux Physio a massive waste. It'd be like telling time with an atomic clock.
    Last edited by drk; 01-12-2006 at 02:52 PM.

  5. #5
    Rising Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NY
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    98
    Do you think that the Definity and Physio are the same (like Chevy and GM). A few labs said it's same technology but different coatings (Definity avail with Gemcoat and Physio with Crizal)? hmmmmm....

  6. #6
    Bad address email on file rhondaboman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Puyallup
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    19
    Pauly

    My understanding is that the Definity starts out with a Plano lens. Both sides are ground to achieve a 50% wider useable area by splitting the add power between the front and back surfaces. Again, this a software designed lens but instead of a corrected curve theory mold or a digitally designed mold (Physio), for the front surface, it is ground like the backside.

  7. #7
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks for participating.

    I added a 4th category, "freeform" lenses.
    (Note that lenses may exist in several categories.)

    A "freeform" lens, then, is a lens that starts out with no surface features, and is cut on a job-by-job basis, but not necessarily is "customized" for the wearer. Adds can be on back surface, this way.

    Example: Definity

    (Maybe, though, back surface progressives are a subset of freeform progressives, a subcategory.)

  8. #8
    Optical Clairvoyant OptiBoard Bronze Supporter Andrew Weiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Brisbane,QLD, Australia
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,397
    Comment about Multigressiv:

    The lens uses as its front surface the Rodenstock Life 2 design. This is a standardized molded design, referred to by Rodenstock as fully aspheric and with "horizontal" and "vertical" symmetry and offsetting the corridor and reading area based on the prescription values. The back surface is custom-ground on a computer-driven surfacing machine. The software calculates how to keep the front surface design in its most "perfect" form by compensating for the abberations which would be caused by the individual's prescription. In my experience, this lens is the best for people with significant astimatism, particularly at an oblique axis, and anisomatropia (?sp?), as well as being an excellent all-purpose progressive. If only they had the machine in America (Rodenstock will not let it out of Regensberg, Germany).

    I really wonder whether Physio's wave-front design will be any significant improvement over what the Multigressiv already does so well . . . Uncle Fester took in an order for our first Physio Saturday, so I'll have a chance to look at the lens sometime this week
    Andrew

    "One must remember that at the end of the road, there is a path" --- Fortune Cookie

  9. #9
    Allen Weatherby
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    1,286

    Trying To Understand Freeform Lens Designs

    Individualized progressives: (Help me out, here)

    Since with back surface progressives, you are cutting unique surfaces, then you might as well vary the parameters to create a specific lens.

    Examples:
    *insets can be more/less depending on distance pd and prismatic power of lens
    *distribution of unwanted astigmatism can be maximized for each add power
    *design can be maximized for specified vertex distance, or pantoscopic tilt, or even frame wrap ("position of wear")
    *design can somehow utilize information about head and eye movements (harder or softer, shorter or longer corridor, etc.)
    *design can take into account fitting height being used

    This requires a free-form, or 3-axis generator.
    The customization occurs on back (and front?) of lens.
    This process saves labs from having to stock many lens types.

    Some free-form designs utilize "generic" data, and others require "patient-specific" data from various in-office measuring devices.
    Ipseo: patient specific
    Gradal Individual: patient specific
    Shamir Autograph:?
    Sola One HD: generic population data?

    It seems as though the input of these patient-specific data guides some software that maximizes some effects and minimizes others to achieve best effect. It's almost as though there is a computer analyzing data, and then spitting out the best design, not unlike what seasoned dispensers try to do when choosing between "pre-made" designs.

    The upshot should be that, on the whole, the patient population should get better vision more consistently by virtue of "automatic design matching".
    All of your points seem to be on target. There is currently not any clear definition to the Freefrom lens subject.

    I will try to help you with your thought process and point out a few of the reasons for some of the marketing speak.

    1-Freeform relates to the ability to cut almost any non-spherical surface desired,(within reason). This can be done on the front side or the backside or both. Freeform is not a lens design. I have seen a Playboy bunny logo produced using freeform machines, however this does mean you can see by using such a lens, it was done to show the unique ability of the equipment compared to machines that can only make spherical cuts.

    2-Lens designs that are programed for use with freeform equipment can actually calculate the surface for each individual design for each patient and frame selected in a very short period of time. This then produces the surface data point files. (These files are thousands of x,y,z data points needed for the freeform machine to operate.

    3-These programs used to produce freeform lenses using advanced individual lens designs are very complex and can take into account any variable that the lens design team can figure out how to have entered and then converted into usable data for each individual lens. These programs are quite complex as you can imagine. Knowing the lens shape including the A and B measurement allows the lens computer designer team to have the program calculate the lens surface to be the thinest possible.

    4- Position of wear can be included in the lens calculations, wrap, panto tilt, and vertex distance. The PD is critical as well as the optical center for these calculations since elements like the wrap angle of the frame are not needed but the wrap angle of the frame center to the optical center is what is needed for to calculate the corrections needed.

    5- Frontside freeform, backside freeform or both sides freeformed? Well when you get through the marketing materials one aspect of freeform designs that is not included in the marketing materials of freeform lenses that have both surfaces non-spherical is this.

    "We would prefer to have produced a lens with a backside freeform design using a spherical front surface, however such an approach is covered by a patent, and we have not been able to obtain permission to produce lenses utilizing this approach."

    For many the use of non-spherical surfaces on both sides is an approach that they can use to produce a lens, may this is not their first choice but a legal way to enter the market.

    6- In addition to better designs for the patient a great freeform lens design program has the ability to take into account many factors that a PAL that is cast on the front can not. The cast lens PAL system uses between 65-90 different semi-finished lens blanks and from this the choices are determined by various spherical cuts to the correct lens. Any design that falls in between one of these blanks can not be made. With a great freeform lens design program the possiblities are almost endless. Over 2,000,000 different PAL designs are possible using one program.

  10. #10
    Bad address email on file QDO1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    UK
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,961
    so now what we all really knew is out in the open

    Freeform, is like Aspheric - it is a word that is miss used

    Aspherical means non spherical. Freeform means cut with a "free tool"

    The following are possible with freeform surfacing:

    +1.00 DS spherical 70 blank CR39 - just like a moulded lens
    +1.00 DS Aspheric 70 blank CR39 with the most appaling optics imaginable

    ranging to the very best in optics...

    When we specifically look at progressives, perhaps what we need is computer software from the manufacturers, that links to a frame tracer, and shows the design each algorythm produces for us, maybee in terms of iso-cylinders. Then as professional dispensers, we can order what we want

    this software could have say 5 screen options - describing the different abberations at each point on the lens

    To me, dispensing "free-form" is like peeing in the wind - we just hope the algorythm keeps getting it right - and we never get a idea of what we really ordered untill it comes back

  11. #11
    Optical Educator
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,044

    Freeform

    I believe that AWTECH is correct with his/her definition of freeform.

    It is a technology, not a design.


    A good lens design on the front is better on the back

    A great lens design on the front is fantastic on the back.

    It could be done on the front (as in mold making) or on the back. If a lab generates a PAL using an X Y Z file system on the back, from a spherical front base, it is a back surface PAL using freeform technology.

    I think splitting between front and back, wavefront, dual adds or otherwise, is an opportunity for greater errors, given the human element.

    I would sum it up as follows:

    Front mold digital design, back surface spherical = good

    Front surface spherical surface, back surface digital mold (freeform) = better

    Split between the front and back, in theory sounds good, but opens up greater possibility of increased aberrations due to human error.

    : )

    Laurie

    PS: Dr K: it is my understanding that they are referring to higher order coma aberration...hardly noticable to the brain.

    Still, as far as we can drive technology, the most commonly complained about aberrations are spherical aberration and chromatic aberration. A material with a better abbe value (trivex) will still out perform a lens that corrects for higher order aberrations, and is made in poly, for example...correcting an obscure higher order aberration, and ignoring chromatism.

  12. #12
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    2 sided.......................

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurie
    Split between the front and back, in theory sounds good, but opens up greater possibility of increased aberrations due to human error.
    How about having distorted areas on both surfaces................or shall I say surface astigmatism.

  13. #13
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks to all contributors!

    Then we can say that back side progressive curves are superior to front side or "dual adds"? I think that's intuitive.

    Has anyone read the marketing claim that Definity's Dual Add technology allows (paraphrase): "aberrations from the front surface to be cancelled out by curves cut on the back surface"? They almost make it sound like they can reduce aberrations better with a "dual add" than a "single surface" add. I don't think I accept this, as I am taking it to mean.

    Does this mean Rodenstock has the patent to the spherical front/backside progressive lens, or is it Seiko's?

  14. #14
    Optical Educator
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,044

    Smilie back side patent

    Hi Dr. K,

    I make the same summary as you in regard to design. A front spherical, back freeform/XYZ file/PAL is the best.

    The Shamir Autograph uses a front spherical/back XYZ/freeform/PAL and may very well hold the patent. It is my understanding that they are the only ones actually making them in the US with partnering labs.

    Hi Chris,

    Yes, it is possible to have aberrations on both surfaces, especially when the front surface is a molded PAL, and the back is a digitally induced XYZ file. The room for error is greater than if it had been a front surface molded PAL with spherical curves (toric base curves and cross curves) or a spherical front (Base Curve) with a digitally induced XYZ file on the back (PAL design, freeform technology).


    : )

    Laurie

  15. #15
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    Laurie, you know your stuff.

  16. #16
    Optical Clairvoyant OptiBoard Bronze Supporter Andrew Weiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Brisbane,QLD, Australia
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,397
    Laurie, does this mean the Autograph puts the progressive add on the back surface? or does it use the Multigressiv approach and use a standardized, molded front surface with the add and then freeform-grind the back surface? Do you know if they use similar parameters as Rodenstock does in designing the back surface for each lens?

    I've had such good success with the Multigressiv, it would be nice to know there's a US-made alternative with similar characteristics.

    drk, thanks for starting this thread. Great education. As to what the Definity does or doesn't do, I can tell you based on wearing them that it has very little, if any, abberation in either the distance peripheral or in the intermediate/near peripheral. Part of this, I believe, is due to the "ground view advantage" design, which shelves off the add toward the periphery and provides actual intermediate vision at the edges of the reading area (after going through a relatively benign blur-zone), and distance vision below the reading area if the height exceeds 26mm (I think). I don't know if this is an accurate comparison, but I think of it as a round-seg type design done in a progressive.
    Last edited by Andrew Weiss; 01-31-2006 at 02:14 PM.
    Andrew

    "One must remember that at the end of the road, there is a path" --- Fortune Cookie

  17. #17
    Allen Weatherby
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    1,286

    Backside PAL Patent information

    The first US Patent issued covering this issue is US Patent 6,019,470.

    This Patent issue is real and I would not recommend selling lenses produced with a backside PAL unless these are manufactured outside of the US.

    This Patent is not licensed to Shamir for the Autograph as I understand.

    I would like to thank Laurie for the confirmation of my belief. I do not understand why Shamir is currently attempting to have their partner labs produce these backside PAL lenses without the assignment of the rights to do so. It is my understanding that Shamir does not have such rights.
    This is a new area for optical lens production and is quite different from other PAL designs in the ability to produce very customized lenses.

  18. #18
    One of the worst people here
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    8,331
    Here is an important question:

    How much value does each addition have.

    For instance, lets assume that the Physio costs $100 to the patient (the product is not in Canada eh yet, so I am making that number up). Now, lets assume the product is better than the Panamic. Finally, what is the value? Meaning will the additional cost of the Physio be greater than, equal to, or less than the Panamic.

    We can use that for all of the lenses.

  19. #19
    Optical Educator
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,044

    freeform and patents

    Hello Again,

    To Dr. K: Thanks! *blush* *blush*

    : )

    To Andrew W: Yes, they are adding the PAL to the back surface. I hesitate to answer your other question, but will forward it to the lens (geeks) engineers at Shamir Insight in San Diego and Israel for further clarification.

    To AWTECH: While I am not a spokesperson for Shamir Insight's legal holdings, I can tell you that their team is outrageously ethical. They won't so much as make a photo copy of an educational handout or article, respecting copyright issues, etc. I will look into your question and report back as soon as I have first party information.

    Laurie

  20. #20
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,386
    ForLife:
    The Physio is priced a trifle higher than Panamic, from what I've seen.

    Is the question: are we getting diminishing returns on investment? A legitimate question!

    Also, I think the comment that was made that a "low aberration" design in a "high aberration" material makes sense.

    Andrew, I think the Definity must be good, based on what you say and what I've read. What is your add power, BTW? You look like about a +1.00;)
    Last edited by drk; 01-31-2006 at 11:31 PM.

  21. #21
    Allen Weatherby
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    1,286
    Laurie;
    The Shamir Autograph uses a front spherical/back XYZ/freeform/PAL and may very well hold the patent. It is my understanding that they are the only ones actually making them in the US with partnering labs.
    In the above you state that Shamir may very well hold the patent. Which they certainly do not hold the original patent for backside progressive maintaining a spherical front surface.

    While I am not a spokesperson for Shamir Insight's legal holdings, I can tell you that their team is outrageously ethical. They won't so much as make a photo copy of an educational handout or article, respecting copyright issues, etc. I will look into your question and report back as soon as I have first party information.
    I await your findings. In another thread someone else reports this patent issue has been resolved. I have not been able to confirm this resolution. I would think if Shamir does have a clearly defined resolution that the information would be available.

  22. #22
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Southeast of Disorder
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    17
    It is my understanding that there are overlapping patents issued covering the technique of spherical front/PAL back. One is owned by Seiko-Epson, the other is owned by Carl Zeiss Vision. Seiko-Epson has given lens companies such as Shamir the right to use this technique, for a small fee, <wholesale pricing removed>. Unfortunately, CZV has not. This issue remains unresolved and is currently the biggest obstacle to this technology coming to market.

  23. #23
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Patents.....................

    Make a search on the US patent office and you will find out. I Zeiss has a patent in Germany only it would not be valid here if no application has been made.

  24. #24
    Bad address email on file QDO1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    UK
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
    Make a search on the US patent office and you will find out. I Zeiss has a patent in Germany only it would not be valid here if no application has been made.
    Well it might be worth remembering Zeiss and Rodenstock are German companies, and Essilor French, and Hoya, Nikon, Seiko and Pentax Japanese... As much as the US believe they are the centre of the world, in Optics, they clearly are not. The US patent office isnt the hub of the world either

    Perhaps thats why Rodenstock and Essilor regularlary release lenses into the european markets years before they get to the US

  25. #25
    The Hi-End PALs Specialist Bobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Thailand
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    381

    www.apcthai.com have been close from politic.

    Hi QD1 ,
    I would like to discuss in this topic , but I can't , because my parent , my brother are fear from the word from some big man in Thailand and my member at www.apcthai.com have to stop our webboard that may be have some thing about ESSILO.... .

    I will try to fight with all strength for freedom of our webboard.

    Sometime , in Thailand , the freedom is so far , but I will be back as soon as possible.

    If I have to do my job in jail , I will do and never regret ,
    may be I will be the optiker in jail and fitting PALs for prisoner around the world.

    Someday , we will not have PALs Mafia in our world anymore , we will see.
    " Life is too short to limit your vision"


    ISOPTIK : The Hi-End Eyeglasses Centre
    494 ERAWAN BANGKOK 4th floor
    Ratchaprasong , Bangkok , Thailand 10330
    isoptik@gmail.com
    www.isoptik.com
    Hotline & SMS : +66 81 538-4200
    Fax. : +66 2 251-3770

    :cheers:

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Best Progressive Lens Technology
    By Shanebug in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-03-2004, 11:22 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-03-2003, 08:56 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-20-2003, 04:06 PM
  4. Essilor And Satis Enter Into Technology And Branding Alliance
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2003, 02:35 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •