Jump to content

Timegrapher setup for PC running Linux (EndeveourOS/Arch)


Recommended Posts

I have a Weishi 1000 timegrapher and happy with it, but, because I am a techno junky and I have seen some great videos of people using PCs with timegrapher software to regulate their watches. Hence,  I am interested in trying to set up a system for myself. Here is the difficult bit... I took the plunge a few years ago and switched to 100% open source software including my operating system (happy to discuss this on another thread), so my PC runs Linux. I did find some open source software called Tg link HERE but without the hardware to test it, it was a little pointless.

Does anyone use a Linux machine to do timegraphing? If so can you recommend some software and/or hardware?

I know I could switch to Windows, or use a virtual windows machine inside Linux, but that kind of defeats the point as I would like to have a native Linux experience.

Useful information:

  • My PC runs the KDE environment of EndeveourOS Linux link HERE which is based on Arch Linux
  • My PC has USB 2/3/C ports which I could use for the timegrapher hardware
Edited by Waggy
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Waggy changed the title to Timegrapher setup for PC running Linux (EndeveourOS/Arch)

I think you can get microphones that hook up to a PC via USB - I don't see how else people could use a PC to do timegraphing. I have seen some on Ali, but before I spend $$$$ on a random device I wanted to see if anyone had any good or bad experience.

Something like this?

TGrapher2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay we've talked about software-based timing machines before on the group. There's two ways to get the input into the computer either through the audio port the microphone port on your computer or with a USB device like the one in the picture.

If you use it through an audio input like a microphone inputs then you need the preamp and a microphone. Which we discussed on this group before. If you use the USB thing from China it's all self-contained. Then depending upon the seller on eBay the price varies.

Then somebody else has shared the USB microphone they took the cover off we see the pictures of it inside.

Then based on the review I did purchase one I would've liked of seeing things done a little bit differently and other than briefly playing with that I haven't really played with the enough to have a super opinion other than I would've liked a couple of things a little bit differently. But still its cheap and casually it seemed to work but maybe this week I'll play with a little more. I just didn't have that much time when I got It.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Waggy said:

I think you can get microphones that hook up to a PC via USB - I don't see how else people could use a PC to do timegraphing. I have seen some on Ali, but before I spend $$$$ on a random device I wanted to see if anyone had any good or bad experience.

Something like this?

I acquired TGBC timegrapher from AliExpress due to lots of positive reviews. It can be used with Tg 0.5.0 app which is available for Linux. I have had mixed results so far. I don't think that the sound quality is good enough for fault finding, but it is good enough for rate adjustment and checking amplitude. The Tg ap had a hard time showing amplitude and waveforms are usually unusable. I will upload a sound recording from TGBC timegrapher so you can check it yourself.

The sound recording:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F9vkVpKCXTBQV5fRNLrwdR2YIyr77wl0/view?usp=sharing

Screenshot from 2023-03-13 16-46-39.png

IMG_20230313_164718_resized_20230313_044748661.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fralex said:

I have had mixed results so far. I don't think that the sound quality is good enough for fault finding,

The problem with mixed results means to a certain degree it's worthless. In other words if you can't determine whether the problem is with the timing device or the watch that is a problem. If you ask the group for help and we can't figure out where the problem is that becomes a problem.

What I noticed was there seems to be a heck of a lot of background noise. In other words with no signal it seems to have way more noise than it should which means the signal sometimes gets lost in the noise as a guess. But I haven't really played with mine enough to really make an analysis of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

What I noticed was there seems to be a heck of a lot of background noise. In other words with no signal it seems to have way more noise than it should which means the signal sometimes gets lost in the noise as a guess. But I haven't really played with mine enough to really make an analysis of it.

It is a real shame, because when I apply the noise reduction effect in Audacity on the recording that I made with TGBC timegrapher the sound becomes really good. Only if I could somehow use real-time noise reduction filter, I think this setup would be great.

Check the difference:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19cql796W9KR_eaKM17ciDtb2Sw8d3P_7/view?usp=sharing

Edited by Fralex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just "thinking out-loud" here but what do you think if I hooked up my existing WeShi 1000 mic to the PC via an adapter cable

WeShi hardware:

t38209_pic1_cmyk2.jpg.d00973f44d9543c9bf7108871b121bc6.jpg

 

Looks like a XLR type connector:

t38209_pic4_cmyk.jpg.e8ce12615657f8cdd8c91f87bc8ea264.jpg

 

So maybe a cable like this could work?

 

55593746_XLRtoUSB.thumb.png.00190564e8ae7f9c34009c35d889d76f.png

Looking again I would need the male XLR to USB version, but I see those too on Amazon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Waggy said:

WeShi 1000 mic to the PC via an adapter cable

WeShi hardware:

It's been discussed before so do a search or go through all the titles in the section with timing machine stuff.. I thought a better way to do it would be to put a splitter on it because when you feed it into the PC you don't need a lot a single and that way you can make use the power supply on the timing machine plus you to make use of the timing machine and then make use of enhanced features found on some of the software a kind of the best of everything. Mainly because it actually is a quite decent microphone not quite as good as a real witschi microphone but still it's a pretty decent microphone overall

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Fralex said:

It is a real shame, because when I apply the noise reduction effect in Audacity on the recording that I made with TGBC timegrapher the sound becomes really good. Only if I could somehow use real-time noise reduction filter, I think this setup would be great.

The problem with this approach of processing the files are your processing them for sound capabilities but the timing machines and or software should be alert do that themselves.

So I had some time today to try an experiment using the Chinese USB microphone with the various software programs. I did get pictures and image captures of you really are curious but there lurking in the other laptop or the camera. So for testing purposes if you're going to compare timing machines and/or software it's best if you can do everything as close as simultaneously as possible.

Simultaneous testing means that the Chinese 1000 machine is holding of the Swiss 6497 in its plastic  movement holder case which isn't quite as nice as if I directly was holding of the movement. But it didn't seem to be an issue. Then the USB microphone is on top also holding the edges of the case yes I did get a picture in  case you're curious what that really looks like. Then laptop is a short distance away I found at the USB microphone was extremely sensitive to audio including the laptop fan so that's why it's mounted a short distance away.

Then the other ideal thing is if all the settings are identical. In other words all of the averaging times have to be the same and ideally you should build a start all the machines and/or software at the exact same times they synchronize exactly the same but I wasn't worried about it. Also haven't calibrated the timing of the software's will be a little variation  their.

So the TG software looked fine except the graphical display indicates that my watch is having issues. Except then the other two programs below show that the watch looked fine. There was variations between all of them but not enough that I get worried about.

So I would like to suggest everyone should try the software below they both have free versions and then they both have paid versions with enhanced features which are well worth it but the free versions will work just fine and definitely have a much more reliable graphic display. In other words you won't be panicking over what's wrong with your escapement.

https://c.web.de/@337134913998293880/YuEh_TobSjaCfyBDix_1gg

 

http://www.watchoscope.com/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier today, I found out that the buzzing sound came from one of the components on the circuit board (I think it came from a capacitor but did not check) so I filled the TGBC timegrapher with cotton wool. That improved things drastically. Static noise was gone, there is still some buzzing from low-quality Piezo I guess but Tg software can filter it out pretty well. The waveform preview is much more usable now.

9 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

So I would like to suggest everyone should try the software below they both have free versions and then they both have paid versions with enhanced features which are well worth it but the free versions will work just fine and definitely have a much more reliable graphic display. In other words you won't be panicking over what's wrong with your escapement.

I tried all of the software. Tg and Watch-O-Scope are pretty comparable. PCTM is best at filtering noise but it is not very accurate in my opinion, the rate was always 6-7 seconds faster than on the other two software (all three of them were calibrated).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fralex said:

capacitor but did not check)

I would be curious as to how you figured that out?

1 hour ago, Fralex said:

so I filled the TGBC timegrapher with cotton wool

Then I'm curious about capacitor problem and filling with cotton wool? My observation was that the case is made out of such thin plastic it seems to transmit sounds quite well. I was thinking of some sort of the sound dampening material to minimize that. So I had to relocate the microphone farther from even the laptop is the laptop fans seemed upset

 

1 hour ago, Fralex said:

Piezo

I didn't realize there was a quality difference in the discs? I do think the disc is a minor problem in that it's a large physical size good for attracting sound through the air hitting it versus what we typically find in the timing machine which is a Something usually considerably smaller less likely to attract audio and usually protected the something much heavier.

1 hour ago, Fralex said:

the rate was always 6-7 seconds faster than on the other two software (all three of them were calibrated)

Interesting that is always faster if they were calibrated? Then how exactly did you do your calibration?

2 hours ago, Fralex said:

buzzing sound came from one of the components on the circuit board (I think it came from a capacitor but did not check)

I was thinking about this I was thinking of electrical buzzing sound are you meaning audio sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

I would be curious as to how you figured that out?

How did I figure that out? Well, I pressed the timegrapher against my ear and I Could hear a buzzing sound coming from it.

When I opened the case, I could see immediately two components that could produce a buzzing sound. A small potentiometer and one capacitor. Both of them can produce a buzzing sound when under stress but my bet is on capacitor. It is called "coil whine".

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

Then I'm curious about capacitor problem and filling with cotton wool? My observation was that the case is made out of such thin plastic it seems to transmit sounds quite well. I was thinking of some sort of the sound dampening material to minimize that. So I had to relocate the microphone farther from even the laptop is the laptop fans seemed upset

Cotton wool is a really good sound-dampening material. It will not affect the sound from the watch movement because that sound is transmitted through the metal part that holds the movement which is soldered on the Piezo but it will isolate coil whine.

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

I didn't realize there was a quality difference in the discs? I do think the disc is a minor problem in that it's a large physical size good for attracting sound through the air hitting it versus what we typically find in the timing machine which is a Something usually considerably smaller less likely to attract audio and usually protected the something much heavier.

I am guessing here. When I managed the coil whine sound there was still a slight humming sound left which I attributed to the low-quality recording component because the Tg app could easily filter it out. I could be wrong, maybe it is something else.

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

Interesting that is always faster if they were calibrated? Then how exactly did you do your calibration?

I calibrated them using a quartz watch. Any computer program that emulates a timing machine takes its time reference from the clock of the audio card of the computer. There is anecdotal evidence that audio cards have usually relatively stable clocks. However, unfortunately, these clocks are often affected by a constant deviation from true time, sometimes of many seconds per day. To correct for it, one must measure the deviation by comparison to a more accurate time source, and then inform the program of its value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 3/14/2023 at 10:46 AM, Fralex said:

PCTM is best at filtering noise but it is not very accurate in my opinion, the rate was always 6-7 seconds faster than on the other two software (all three of them were calibrated).

I'm still feeling a little confused with if it's always  6-7 seconds faster Can't that be calibrated because it seems like that's a consistent number?

Edited by JohnR725
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

 

I'm still feeling a little confused with if it's always  6-7 seconds faster Can't that be calibrated because it seems like that's a consistent number?

Sorry, I expressed myself a little clumsy. It is not constant, that is the problem. One moment it is 1 second faster, another moment it is 5 seconds faster, and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Fralex said:

It is not constant, that is the problem. One moment it is 1 second faster, another moment it is 5 seconds faster, and so on.

I wonder if you can change the averaging time of the software? If you look at timing specifications for watches they usually specify 20 seconds averaging time-based are you having a witschi timing machine. So maybe the software's averaging over a much shorter time span and mechanical watches unfortunately very so you're going to see that variation.

It's like the inconsistency of the graphical display of the TG software makes they wonder if it can even produce a decent graphical display. This becomes a problem on this message board and this also applies to typically phone apps where the graphical display just doesn't look very good and people are asking diagnostic help with their watch and we can't trust the app or the software whatever then it's definitely an issue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/13/2023 at 3:29 AM, Waggy said:

I took the plunge a few years ago and switched to 100% open source software including my operating system (happy to discuss this on another thread), so my PC runs Linux. I did find some open source software called Tg link HERE but without the hardware to test it, it was a little pointless.

I suggest getting my version of tg from github, https://github.com/xyzzy42/tg  The original author stopped responding around three years ago, so it seems I have taken over.  I started using Linux back in '93 have been Linux only since the late 90s.  So I can assure you, tg works quite well on Linux!  I wish someone could help with the Windows version.  While I have reports it works and I have tried not to break it, I don't have the system to make new installer packages for windows and I think a lot of people need those.

I suggest the `json-dump` or `trentpi/color-coded-tics` branches.  I been meaning to put together a release for months but there's always something I want to fix first.

Those inexpensive microphone boxes on alix work fine.  I have the one with the stand that rotates, which is quite nice for testing positions.  It has analog out.  I like the additional control my computer's audio hardware gives me over the built in USB audio on some other models.

My version of tg contains many updates that are designed around improving audio quality and dealing with noise.  There is a true PPM meter to help set audio gain.  The TFR spectrograms are very nice for detecting background noise if it can be isolated by frequency.  And I added an IIR audio filter chain system to help remove said noise.

A lot I have shown and described already, so searching for posts by me in the Watch Tools -> Timegrapher forum will be very instructive.  There are screen shots of what I've talked about.  Also checkout the thread here, it's 30 pages; I suggest starting at the end and going backward.

On 3/16/2023 at 2:20 PM, JohnR725 said:

It's like the inconsistency of the graphical display of the TG software makes they wonder if it can even produce a decent graphical display.

I think it works well.  Can you describe what is wrong?

There is an issue with how the beat is timed, based on the lock rather than the unlock.  This results in variations in the escape teeth showing up as a cyclic pattern even though they do not effect timing.  One thing I'd like to do it allow switching to unlock for timing, but unlock needs better quality audio and it seems many struggle already.

The averaging interval is a complex subject.  TG uses a different algorithm than other software and detects the rate error by looking at the peak auto-correlation of the signal.  The window over which this is calculated is 32 seconds.   But this is not the same thing as averaging interval.  But it does mean a similar thing if one wants to know if the errors relating to a given wheel will be averaged out or not, based on whether a completely revolution of the wheel is included in the averaging interval.

On 3/13/2023 at 9:07 AM, Fralex said:

You were quite right to suspect an electronic noise source!  Using my version of tg, we can quickly see the issues in the signal monitor window.

image.thumb.png.fa7c2211fd2348c47f6cfa56f2a58bb4.png

The signal level of -16.9 dBFS is in the green, neither too quiet nor clipping.  But look at that noise about about 7000 Hz!  There is your problem.

This can be address via the audio filters.  I adjust the default high-pass filter to 3000 Hz.  Looks like mostly noise under that.  Then I create a very narrow notch filter at 7000 Hz.

image.thumb.png.d53d87eb66e8798d40006c851ba72659.png

Noise, be gone!  The line at 7 kHz is now gone.

image.png.69e0c2b27e4f0f6770bf9f40d15bf44e.png

Lets look at the waveforms.  They are a bit muddled.

image.png.44b2b92af2f156e1896a9539d249bed8.png

The tic spectrogram shows this better:

image.png.78a00b934c31903848cecaa78629d1cd.png

See how the sound at 5 kHz, while clearly part of the beat, seems to start at the unlock and then just keep going.  And it's loud.  It's covering up the more distinct unlock, impulse, lock sounds we get around 14000 Hz.  So we'll add a peaking filter to amplify that section.

image.thumb.png.2249f71a9a944cd3ddb0350bf0d0e5c4.png

Now the 14 kHz sound looks strong vs the 5 kHz.

image.png.765301ee416e10e2e15773a35dae6fb6.png

And the waveforms, we can see the unlock, impulse, and lock more distinctly now.  Amplitude measurement will be better, as it needs to identify the sounds within the beat.  The rate error uses an auto-correlation algorithm that considers the entire beat as a whole, so it doesn't matter as much for that.

image.png.26092885872e89de37a8f76f340790ae.png

The stair-steps every 15 seconds are of course the 15 second audio sample @Fralex posted being repeated.  This messes up the s/d calculation.  The yellow line is the amplitude graph, which also repeats every 15 seconds.

image.png

image.png

image.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2023 at 4:40 AM, xyzzy said:

Those inexpensive microphone boxes on alix work fine.  I have the one with the stand that rotates, which is quite nice for testing positions.  It has analog out.  I like the additional control my computer's audio hardware gives me over the built in USB audio on some other models.

Can you send a link for the microphone you describe, and I'll give it a go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2023 at 5:40 PM, xyzzy said:

Those inexpensive microphone boxes on alix work fine.  I have the one with the stand that rotates, which is quite nice for testing positions.  It has analog out.  I like the additional control my computer's audio hardware gives me over the built in USB audio on some other models.

Just as a warning for anyone looking who doesn't get a link to the exact item pay attention to well lets the problem.  the older style is I will call it is the one that he's describing it as audio out does not have USB and it looks a little bit different and some versions had a stand.

The newer version is USB and seems to come with differing pictures but usually the Chinese have generic representations at whatever they're selling. So if you want the audio one you want to make sure it specifically says audio and not USB oh and I've seen a USB version that does have audio  out for the speaker.

OR basically never quite know what you're getting if you order Chinese stuff. But it can be really cheap and some of it can be really good and some of it of course can be well really bad.

On 3/18/2023 at 5:40 PM, xyzzy said:

I think it works well.  Can you describe what is wrong?

There is an issue with how the beat is timed, based on the lock rather than the unlock.  This results in variations in the escape teeth showing up as a cyclic pattern even though they do not effect timing.

Okay so here's where is having a problem a while back somebody asked the question on the group and based on the graphical display their watch looks really bad. On this group we do rely on the graphical display for diagnostics purposes beyond just timing. So my problem becomes can I rely on a particular piece of software to give me a proper graphical display of what the problem is?

Then I was running a test today we do have to be careful with the test results because of some minor issues. One issue is some of the software is set the 44° lift angle and others are defaulting  to the normal 52°. So there'll be conceivably amplitude variations. Also I didn't calibrate anything even though one piece of software indicates the calibration I hadn't applied it. So conceivably all the timing will be off or very a little bit. All I really cared about today was the graphical display what is it telling us.

Then I found in the past when testing timing machines it's always best to look at the same watch at the exact same time and not move things around because that introduces problems. So the test watch today is a Hamilton 992B it's in desperate need to be serviced and as you can see two microphones one watch.

The Chinese 1000 timing machine is producing something that looks quite decent. Just a little slow hair out of beat and the graphical screen looks outstanding. But with the limited number of pixels is not good I have the resolution that the software will. This is where if you go to a witschi timing machine they usually have magnification and then you can make everything that looks wonderful at this setting look horrible. So I'm guessing the reason it looks as nice as it does is because of the low resolution.

The watch escapement analyzer software is indicating from the graphical display that one side of the escapement looks like it's having an issue.

The PC timing machine software graphically doesn't really show a beat and actually looks quite decent.

The watch o scope software looks like similar to the  fit in analyzer it looks like one slides having an issue

Then for the PC version of the TG software it doesn't have the wonderful optimistic view of the Chinese 1000 timing machine. It doesn't even have the half optimistic view of some of the other software were at least it's 50% good it just says my escapement looks like crap.

So I'm back to the problem of the discussion up above can we rely on the software the graphical display to make diagnostics of the escapement or can it only be used for timing?

 

 

 

 

 

ctm 1 992b.JPG

ctm 2 992b.JPG

etimer 992b.JPG

pctm 992.JPG

tg 992b.JPG

wos 1 992b.JPG

wos 2 992b.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Waggy said:

Can you send a link for the microphone you describe, and I'll give it a go!

I wrote it up here, with link, in this post:

Of course with alix, you never know.  I discovered my 1500 mAh 14500 cells are just 300 mAh.  I know 1500 was wrong, 14500 don't come that large, but thought maybe they'd be 600-750.  Oh well.  Cost less to get them just shipping alone from a more reputable supplier.  Win some lose some.

The microphone stand has been fine.

11 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

The watch escapement analyzer software is indicating from the graphical display that one side of the escapement looks like it's having an issue.

The PC timing machine software graphically doesn't really show a beat and actually looks quite decent.

The watch o scope software looks like similar to the  fit in analyzer it looks like one slides having an issue

Then for the PC version of the TG software it doesn't have the wonderful optimistic view of the Chinese 1000 timing machine. It doesn't even have the half optimistic view of some of the other software were at least it's 50% good it just says my escapement looks like crap.

This is an old version of TG.  There have been bugs fixed since and also a horizontal paperstrip that makes a better use of screen space.

The whishi 1000 has poor resolution, so I guess we probably can't see small errors like this on it.

The software apps all do seem to show an issue with one side.

What I can see that is an issue, is scale.  On tg, you can see the label, "20 ms".  On newer versions this can be smoothly zoomed in or out.  Zoom out enough, and it will look just fine!  Watch-o-scope looks like it does have a scale on the left side, but I can't see in the screenshot how to interpret it.

So to compare like-to-like, all should be set to zoom in the same amount.  Or at least take that into consideration, e.g. the whishi can't zoom so one is stuck with low resolution.

Next, tg is timing based on the lock.  This has certain issues.  One is we see the beats are not the same length.  I do not mean beat error!  I mean, unlock to lock is different between the two.  The top beat is maybe 0.3 ms shorter than the bottom.  This will affect the beat error measurement, if we were to switch to using unlock instead of lock.

It also looks like the lock is long and relatively constant volume.  This will result in the peak detect wandering more.  I wonder if the gain is too high and the sound is clipping?  Newer version has code to detect this.

There are those glitched beats every so often.  This could be some other noise.  It could a real noise from the escapement too.  I think other software has very tight gating and so will lose a noise that is too far out of the expected place.  I.e., I could erase those dots from the screen shot so it looks better, but the sound that caused them is still there.  Just because other software does not show it, does not mean it isn't there and that not showing it is correct thing to do.  This is what gating is, clean up the dots that are not near the other dots because they are probably wrong.  Unless they aren't.

I notice it looks like every ~15 seconds there is a single late beat.  Does any wheel have a period of 15 seconds?  I wonder if this might actually be real.

One thing I want to add is audio history. So one can click on the late/early beat and then see the spectrogram of that point and try to figure out if was someone typing on the keyboard or maybe really was part of the watch.

We most also consider the computer.  Were all pc software traces done on the same computer, same microphone, same audio input, etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, xyzzy said:

This is an old version of TG.  There have been bugs fixed since and also a horizontal paperstrip that makes a better use of screen space.

Okay as I have the older version where I get the new version for the PC?

8 hours ago, xyzzy said:

hat I can see that is an issue, is scale.  On tg, you can see the label, "20 ms".  On newer versions this can be smoothly zoomed in or out.  Zoom out enough, and it will look just fine!  Watch-o-scope looks like it does have a scale on the left side, but I can't see in the screenshot how to interpret it.

So to compare like-to-like, all should be set to zoom in the same amount.  Or at least take that into consideration, e.g. the whishi can't zoom so one is stuck with low resolution

Thinking about Zoom I decided to take the watch to work where I can zoom it considerably more and get really nice captures on the screen. Normally the zoom of 2 looks like what I would think it should look on well in a timing machine. Then I went to 8 and then 16 and trace still looks pretty good.

8 hours ago, xyzzy said:

I notice it looks like every ~15 seconds there is a single late beat.  Does any wheel have a period of 15 seconds?  I wonder if this might actually be real.

I did run a time plot I'm not sure if we can really see every  15 seconds but you'll see there's the minor issues. But in real life stuff like this will average out over time. They just look interesting on the time plot. Then the numbers are all really close or not seeing dramatic differences.

8 hours ago, xyzzy said:

We most also consider the computer.  Were all pc software traces done on the same computer, same microphone, same audio input, etc?

Then yesterday everything was done with the Chinese USB microphone. All in the same computer basically one right after another nothing else was changed.

 

Snapshot_SN_00396_08.png

Snapshot_SN_00396_10.png

Snapshot_SN_00396_11.png

Snapshot_SN_00396_21.png

Snapshot_SN_00396_23.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...