![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Before asking NCASE about Micro-ATX...
- Thread starter wahaha360
- Start date
Btw, prava, what's the problem with side vents? Aside from increasing size.
vipz
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 815
Not prava, but I'm against them as well, on looks alone. Maybe except for render #2 since they don't stand out as much, as shown on the red example.
The M-style front doesn't work either, IMO. Looks like a sad robot
The M-style front doesn't work either, IMO. Looks like a sad robot
CertainlyNotRandy
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2012
- Messages
- 50
I like side vents... Front vents end up looking more dusty. Solid front panels let out less noise and look cleaner, just my opinion.
CertainlyNotRandy
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2012
- Messages
- 50
How is the space for cables like usb3 on the bottom of an atx board, would the PSU interfere?
The front IO seems kinda out of place, the chamfer is nice.
vipz
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 815
How about an approach like the Phanteks EVOLV where you still have a solid front panel but no holes on the side panels? Other cases with the same approach include the NZXT Source 210 and the Bitfenix Prodigy except when in black.
The only way I see the M-style working visually is to keep the I/O at the bottom like the M1, which would be bad considering the size of this makes it necessary to consider the case being put under the desk.
Acoustically I agree that side vents are a good solution. and visually the front of the case would be nicer with a solid front panel, but I i prefer the renderings like #2 where the front panel wraps over/under the side vents instead of the side vents being punched into the sides of the front panel.
jalex3 has a good point with the dust.
IMO while the Phanteks design works for that case, a lot of the minimalist beauty lies in precision alignment of panels, and those kinds of gaps kind of spoil it.
Acoustically I agree that side vents are a good solution. and visually the front of the case would be nicer with a solid front panel, but I i prefer the renderings like #2 where the front panel wraps over/under the side vents instead of the side vents being punched into the sides of the front panel.
jalex3 has a good point with the dust.
IMO while the Phanteks design works for that case, a lot of the minimalist beauty lies in precision alignment of panels, and those kinds of gaps kind of spoil it.
ghabhaducha
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2014
- Messages
- 3
What's the vertical distance from the base to the bottom of the power button assembly? Is it possible to put dual 180mm fans instead of dual 140mm?
Edit~ Just realized the 400mm was depth not height, so I feel stupid bringing up dual 180. Dual 140mm is still great, and the last proposed design is excellent. Question, any reason you aren't considering reverse matx like the tj08b-e?
Edit~ Just realized the 400mm was depth not height, so I feel stupid bringing up dual 180. Dual 140mm is still great, and the last proposed design is excellent. Question, any reason you aren't considering reverse matx like the tj08b-e?
Last edited:
A quick scan of avalable X99 and Z170 ATX boards seem to indicat that most/all of them has a usb 3.0 connector near the 24pin power connector. On some X99 boards which have two of them, the second one would be blocked, but that wouldn't be a problem as thet won't be needed for this case anyway. the front I/O and audio connectors could be a real PITA though. Extender cables could solve this, but still...
And of course we don't know that next gen motherboards will keep it this way.
I would buy it for any price. I like the edges and diagonal shapes. It has "character" and stands out while still maintaining the minimalism. I certainly prefer that approach over designs with round edges (which I find boring most of the time).
However, I can see why you did not favorite that approach. The I/O looks out of place. apparently it works best at the bottom or maybe at the top, but the first option doesn't work well with that for factor, and the latter - an inverted M1 I/O at the top - well, I can't imagine that it would look better.
The ODD slot looks just wrong. If it has to be there, I would integrate it into the I/O panel - which would problaby force you to move the entire I/O panel closer to the bottom with the ODD sitting on the HDD cage. Or use thevariant 1b layout for your M1 design. Both would also result in a cleaner internal layout.
I like the internal layout. It's very clean and great to show off your hardware. And I like the direction with just three case fans that still provide excellent cooling through an efficient layout. My only concern is that we aren't as unique, clever and space efficient as with the M1.
As for the dimensions, I assume the "400mm" is the depth of the case. That's a lot in my opinion. The Enthoo Evolv has the same depth, a similar internal layout (with more cooling options) and a halfway sleek exterior with solid aluminium as well. I see the risk that people would just get the Enthoo Evolv for half the price. I would try to make the case as short as possible, even if it means that the recessed rear I/O area has to go.
I like the chamfered edges
Variants I would like to see based on that design (and your previous "most recent" design):
1 - Variant 1b with your M1 design. The ODD integrated into the M1 I/O panel and the entire I/O panel moved to the bottom of the drive section in variant 1b (so the ODD would be at the bottom of the section as well, contrary to variant 1b).
2 - Variant 1b with your previous design.
I think that these two designs are very interesting, and the variant 1b has in my opinion the most potential of all internal layouts to offer something new and different. I'm seeing a top section with the PSU and all drives that has its own separate cover for easy access to the drives, and I see an internal layout that is void of any clutter in the component section.
And will I have been an advocate of an M1 design, I think that your previous design is the more interesting one. It's different (let#s face it, chamfered edges are a Jonsbo thing), it less complex and uses less material and fewer components (which hopefully helps to reach a more interesting price point) and it has the potential to be significantly smaller without sacrificing performance.
CertainlyNotRandy
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2012
- Messages
- 50
Yeah I was thinking it would look pretty good like that. Though as you say limits it to desk only and is more like to be obstructed even so.
Perhaps flip it so the "V" cut out is pointing up and move it to the very top of the case. Though that would mess with ODD.
I guess it comes down to who manufactures it and tooling. I cant recall a Lian-Li example that would work.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 222586
Guest
1) Everybody uses them.
2) I don't think they look elegant or good.
3) They make the front too wide to my liking.
How to create space for air? Well, I think you have 2 options here:
a) You have a solid facade.
1) Try to keep all intakes on top or bottom of the case. They will more than suffice, and they don't destroy the looks. By the way, using a top radiator to exhaust is a very bad idea. Radiadors should ALWAYS be used as intakes.
2) Even if you don't want to have a perforated top due to looks, and dust, you could also make it work with only bottom intakes. You could even have a fan in the front that was feeding from the bottom, by not having the facade flush with the bottom part of the case. It would also make cleaning the filter much easier because you would have to remove only the facade. With that, and a single exhaust fan, you would have a decent enough positive pressure system, and enough air to have some decent temperatures.
b) You have a perforated facade.
1) With such a style it makes sense to have a perforated top, as it creates a pattern. Dust becomes a problem, though, unless you want to use the fans as intakes (because you would have dust filters... oterhwise, as exhausts, you will never filter them and dust will get in once the computer is off).
2) Or you keep only the front as a perforated pannel, and use fans on the front and bottom to create a positive pressure system.
---
Also, the M1 bottom I/O pannel only works if you keep it in the bottom, in my opinion. Otherwise it looks like a half-assed job, because it doesn't make sense.
And even in the bottom it looks kinda weird if you don't keep the front as a single piece.
----
I'm thinking... that you could keep the M1's bracket without using any side vents. But that would only work in a reversed ATX (or mATX) configuration. How would that work? Well, by having the bracket not flush with the side pannel, and having a gap on the floor. You could keep all the pannels solid, the most sensible temperature component (the cpu) would be the one to get fresh air first, and you could have side fans as intakes and then use an hdd bracket like the one used on the M1. Just imagine a reversed M1, with the side fans bracket not flush with the structure of the case, and feeding from the top (now bottom, cause reversed).
I don't know... but I do know that the bracket you created gives a heck of a ton of flexibility. And because the case has to be longer than the M1, you would get enough space for probably any 240mm rad out there.
---
Regarding current designs, the only one I'd consider is this one (sans the window)
But only because its the only one that looks "fresh" to me, and different from where the market is going.
I agree with prava in that this 'half G5' design is the only one that has piqued my interest. And that's not just because I love the G5. The scaled up M1 designs don't feel right.
However I haven't seen anything yet that really offers anything new. The USP of the M1 was a low-compromise, low-footprint ITX case. The designs so far haven't really done the same thing for mATX – they're pretty, but all about the same sort of size as other mATX cases on the market. Maybe we have already arrived at the optimal mATX arrangement with the TJ08?
In a nutshell – I can see why Necere has been struggling with this.
However I haven't seen anything yet that really offers anything new. The USP of the M1 was a low-compromise, low-footprint ITX case. The designs so far haven't really done the same thing for mATX – they're pretty, but all about the same sort of size as other mATX cases on the market. Maybe we have already arrived at the optimal mATX arrangement with the TJ08?
In a nutshell – I can see why Necere has been struggling with this.
The problem I have with the "half G5" design is ... well, it is a half "G5 design". On the other hand I agree that the silver frame with the clean black front panel makes a great and clean look.
Going back to Necere's other and more recent G5'ish two-color design with the variant 1b as interior (which I'd still like to see in that combination) I would to suggest to divide the components chamber from the "maintenance chamber" with an S-shaped mainboard tray similar to what NZXT is doing with their recent cases or what Silverstone has done in the Raven RVZ02 to divide the GPU from the rest of the system.
The result would be a second floor between the mainboard and the maintenance section. Advantages:
1 - The waste heat of the componentes wouldn't reach the hard drives or get trapped between the PSU and the drives.
2 - It would be easier to use the space between the PSU and the drives for cable management. You could probably even make the case narrower because you wouldn't need the space behind the mainboard anymore to store cables. A cable duct between the mainbord and the PSU would be enough to route power cables to the top left corner of the mainboard. For the rest you would have the space between the PSU and the drives and any space you can add between then mainboard and the front panel.
3 - It would probably be easy to design a very modular "maintenance section" for many different drive drifferent configurations. You could probably even avoid a separate drive cage (and save some costs) if you can design the maintenance section to be the drive cage (probably for vertically mounted HDDs).
4 - You could place a water-pump and a reservoir in that section. With a separate top section cover it would be easy to perform any maintenance tasks. Need to refill your water reservoir? Just remove the top section cover and have direct access to your water cooling equipment.
Going back to Necere's other and more recent G5'ish two-color design with the variant 1b as interior (which I'd still like to see in that combination) I would to suggest to divide the components chamber from the "maintenance chamber" with an S-shaped mainboard tray similar to what NZXT is doing with their recent cases or what Silverstone has done in the Raven RVZ02 to divide the GPU from the rest of the system.
The result would be a second floor between the mainboard and the maintenance section. Advantages:
1 - The waste heat of the componentes wouldn't reach the hard drives or get trapped between the PSU and the drives.
2 - It would be easier to use the space between the PSU and the drives for cable management. You could probably even make the case narrower because you wouldn't need the space behind the mainboard anymore to store cables. A cable duct between the mainbord and the PSU would be enough to route power cables to the top left corner of the mainboard. For the rest you would have the space between the PSU and the drives and any space you can add between then mainboard and the front panel.
3 - It would probably be easy to design a very modular "maintenance section" for many different drive drifferent configurations. You could probably even avoid a separate drive cage (and save some costs) if you can design the maintenance section to be the drive cage (probably for vertically mounted HDDs).
4 - You could place a water-pump and a reservoir in that section. With a separate top section cover it would be easy to perform any maintenance tasks. Need to refill your water reservoir? Just remove the top section cover and have direct access to your water cooling equipment.
I disagree. The window should either be placed in relation to the external shape (like the picture above) leaving you to manage the internals so they look good, or not be there at all. It shouldn't be a randomly sized/shaped "peeping hole" but an actual design feature coherent with the rest of the case.
I did not say aesthetics should be compromised by limiting the size of the window - I did state however the window shouldn't be the entire size of the case. I don't need to see my power supply through a window - even hard drives are not "sexy".
Like on the above image this would be preferred for me: http://imgur.com/bdrUwzZ
What about no window at all? That way people can make their own windows, which isn't hard. Necere could prepare the sidepanel for a window mod. Aren't there purchasable window kits in all kinds and shapes out there? Couldn't Necere just print a cutout for certain popular window kits into the inside of the side panel so that you just have to take the side panel to any suitable workshop that can cut the window for you?
Phuncz
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,630
So about the 2B layout (with the subtle Mac Pro hints), I have a suggestion that might solve two "issues":
- the PSU has it's intake internally
- the ODD slot has a visible slot
Now if the black front would be contracted about 3mm all-around, like it would seem like it's floating, it could allow the PSU to be mounted with it's fan towards the front if the design would be modified accordingly. Maybe even add a fan option on the front below the PSU. It would also mean more noise but maybe some creative designing could allow this "feature" to be swapped with a part or two to close it off. Like a "full panel" or maybe a replaceable front structure part that would replace the open space with fan mount support for a closed part with storage mount support.
Oh yes and the ODD slot could basically become invisible because it would reside in the shadow of the opening between the silver panels and the black front panel. It would require the ODD to be moved a little so the slot would allign with the gap between the panels.
- the PSU has it's intake internally
- the ODD slot has a visible slot
Now if the black front would be contracted about 3mm all-around, like it would seem like it's floating, it could allow the PSU to be mounted with it's fan towards the front if the design would be modified accordingly. Maybe even add a fan option on the front below the PSU. It would also mean more noise but maybe some creative designing could allow this "feature" to be swapped with a part or two to close it off. Like a "full panel" or maybe a replaceable front structure part that would replace the open space with fan mount support for a closed part with storage mount support.
Oh yes and the ODD slot could basically become invisible because it would reside in the shadow of the opening between the silver panels and the black front panel. It would require the ODD to be moved a little so the slot would allign with the gap between the panels.
vipz
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 815
That is how I want the front intake if it can still do its job. The ODD slot hidden in the vents in the front is how I envisioned it when I first put forth that suggestion.
Is there a better name for the "half G5" design because IMO it doesn't look anything like the G5/Mac Pro with the black front and no handles on top.
Also, I have made up my mind about the internal layout. I have settled towards the 1C for a simple front to back airflow scheme and possibly smaller footprint.
I personally don't care about the window but if it is there I agree it should be placed in relation to the external shap first and foremost. The frame should be minimized on at least the front and back, and ideally the top also, analogue to small bezels on monitors/TVs and high screen-to-body ratios in phones nowadays. If you can't cable-manage your way around it then a window probably isn't for you. I'm not a fan of oddly shaped or tiny windows.
While we are on the topic of windows, please please please no acrylic. Tempered glass all the way. It would be ideal if the window could be made of the same type of thin, flexible, but tough glass they make screen protectors out of.
iFreilicht
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2014
- Messages
- 1,346
Doesn't that half G5 design also look extremely similar to the EVGA Hadron to anyone? Or 4RTEX FPS-CASE1?
Not that I don't like it, but I knew it looked familiar to me and know I know why.
Not that I don't like it, but I knew it looked familiar to me and know I know why.
That's a good point. I didn't realize a lot of motherboards have the USB 3.0 header at the bottom edge of the board. According to the ATX specification, nothing in the card slot area is supposed to exceed 0.6" (15mm), and I guess they're technically complying... it's the USB 3.0 connector that is too tall. Kind of stupid that they do it though, since it's also a problem for GPUs in the last slot.
Aside from the USB 3.0 header, the other connectors (front audio, power) keep within the height limit, so they aren't an issue.
This won't work. The ODD (and front ports) has to be near the edge - either top, bottom, or side. Most of the front needs to be kept free for the front fans/rad. Also the front fans are there to provide airflow to the drives as well, which they can't do if the ODD/front ports are between them.
The M1's space efficiency is only possible by making it essentially a completely perforated box, with vents on every side (excepting the front). I explained in my design post why I wanted to get away from that (noise and dust).
The Evolv is also 65mm taller and 35mm wider, and is limited to four expansion slots, so naturally it has more cooling options.
Remember that the shrouded front intake adds some 20mm to the depth of the case. If you really want to reduce the depth, that has to go, and we have to look at a perforated front instead.
Internally, the depth is already about where it needs to be IMO, for what I think is the optimal feature balance. Right now, you can make some tradeoffs with how to use the available space, prioritizing PSU length, drives, or watercooling:
Variant 1b can't support an ATX board, just so we're clear. ATX support depends on the PSU overlapping the bottom PCIe slots.
Your #1 won't work, as I explained above. #2 is fine though.
Jonsbo released their W-series cases well after the M1. Not that the M1 was the first to do it, either, I'm just saying.
Say we did that and put the PSU drives in their own chamber. How does the PSU intake work? If it draws air from inside the chamber, it's an extra 12mm or so to the case height for intake space, plus the partition itself.
Just a note: The 195mm width of the M-styled concept has zero space added behind the motherboard for cables. The width is entirely dictated by the 165mm CPU cooler and support for a window.
Good thoughts, though keep in mind any front-mounted dual radiator will extend into the compartment, since even an mATX board with five slots is still only 264mm tall, while 240 rads typically start at 275mm, and 280 rads at about 315mm.
I'm confused about this. How do they affect width at all?
I did go over why I don't prefer bottom-top airflow (dust, floor clearance, filter access). This also eliminates layouts 1a-1c from consideration.
That's a strong statement. I would argue that it's actually desirable to have radiators exhausting, *if* both the CPU and GPU(s) are watercooled. Nothing else in the system generates much heat, and the slight warming that is there isn't going to affect loop temps significantly. In the case of CPU-only watercooling and axial fan GPUs dumping their heat into the case (and rad intake) I agree with you, however.
So like the S340, but only a front-bottom intake? My concern there is it seems fairly restrictive, and I think the facade would need to be even deeper to ensure decent airflow.
I agree.
This would eliminate the possibility of a window, since you'd pretty much have to use the bracket.
Also, where does the PSU go in this scenario? Bottom front, like 2c?
My concern with it, as I've expressed, is that 2mm aluminum may not be sturdy enough for the design of the feet. 4mm would, but that would likely be cost-prohibitive to make the entire out shell out of, and we can't punch the vent holes in the top.Regarding current designs, the only one I'd consider is this one (sans the window)
But only because its the only one that looks "fresh" to me, and different from where the market is going.
And what about the layout? That concept is based on the 2b layout, which has the upward-exposed PSU problem. It's also intended for a top-mounted radiator as exhaust, which you think is a bad idea. One of the front-to-back layouts could conceivably be adapted for the design, but the floor clearance provided by the foot then becomes redundant, and it's sort of extra volume for no functional reason.
I should point out that the PSU and drives (there are none in that render, but if there were) are just as visible.
That layout has a centered motherboard though, which favors a centered window, and that's why it looks nice. If you have the PSU at the top or bottom, rather than the front, it forces the motherboard up or down and you end up seeing less of it, and more of the PSU (if the window is kept centered). If the window isn't centered, it can look strange to have a blank space on the side panel. A way of addressing that is what I did with this design - note the top section, which keeps the window centered in the side panel despite the PSU being at the top.
A 3mm gap isn't nearly enough of a gap for decent airflow. Plus the ODD can't be that close to the edge of the case.
It's not really any smaller if has a solid front with edge intakes, since it needs more room for airflow.
I would take that route and go with your two colored "Mac design". Are we afraid of perforated front panels? They can look super cool (yet clean) if done right (and as far as I can tell you are doing it right).
I was thinking of leaving the area undernath the PSU open. That's actually how it's done in my current case, that has a cage for the PSU with a cutout in the bottom.
I was mislead by the pictures then. Good decision to not add space for cable management behind the mainboard tray.
Well, like I said in another comment I think you should add some space underneath the mainboard anyway. That won't be enough though according to this, so there would have to be a cutout in the floor of the "maintenance section". With the hole for the PSU I'm not sure if there would still be enough of that "floor" left to make sense.
He was probably mainly talking about the look of the case. And after some consideration and after seeing the M1 design I agree with most people here that the Mac-like appearence is worthy of further resarch. Too bad that the feet might not work with 2mm aluminium.
Last edited:
vipz
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 815
That's fair. Maybe there can be two versions of the front panel like with the SG05 and 06 if we are going with the "aluminum tube" design?
vipz
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 815
I don't care about the Mac-Pro-style feet either especially if the case has a simple front to back airflow scheme.
I think it's ironic that people clamor about size, but are perfectly happy to have a couple of superfluous aluminum hoops at the bottom adding an inch to the height
You know my position: I have no problem with extra height, only with extra depth (and too much width). I a find 30 liter case with a small footprint way more interesting than a 20 liter case with a huge footprint (like all these showbox designs on the market).
Sure, but realistically, where would you cut down on depth? Look at the pic I posted of the internals again. We can save space by going with a perforated front panel, but we're still at 380mm. If we reduce it much more, it seriously cuts into the ability to mount a front rad with reference-length GPUs and/or medium-length PSU with hard drives.
Also, a taller-than-deep design would look somewhat awkward. It can work for certain designs, but not with really with any of the ones I've posted. The "Half Mac" is 390x390mm.
Last edited:
That would be okay for me. I prefer the "Mac design" anyway and I'm not afraid of a perforated front panel. But 400mm are more or less the upper limit for me. Beyond that limit we are entering a territory were other cases (and other proportions or even other form-factors) become more interesting for me. Therefore I'm grateful for every centimeter that we can save. I don't expect you to design a 350mm case. 360 to 380mm is okay for me.
By the way, do we need the recessed rear I/O panel? Why not just have a flat rear panel?
No, the rear doesn't need to be recessed, and it's cheaper and easier to make it flat. But the PCI card retaining tabs stick out 10mm or so anyway, so it's not like any actual depth is saved. Also if you're using pull-off side panels like the M1, there needs to be some overhang to provide something to pull on.
I still vote for the mac design and no widows.(people can cut them),but 400mm is becoming too long.Looking at the jonsbo umx3 it is possible to squeze all the cool stuff in 25-26l case having the psu on the front.I even think that the umx3 can chop 1-2 cm from the lenght and 1-2 from the height.
Good point: I either lose some space with the recessed rear I/O and the extra depth, or with the extra room I need for the connectors. And I prefer a recessed rear I/O anyway. It looks nicer and 120mm AiO-coolers don't reach that far into the case.
@majic12
I think the general idea is to design a performance cooling case with a little footprint (and fewer fans and vents) and not the smallest mATX possible. There is no room for decent water cooling inside the Jonsbo UMX3.
Actually, with some minor modifications the UMX3 layout is not bad. It's essentially a more condensed version of the 2b layout. I think with dimensions of 365x365x195mm, it could support 2x140mm intake fans on the bottom, top 140mm+thin rad, and a rear 120mm. The bottom could support a 240 or 280 radiator as well, depending on GPUs used.
The "half mac" is far and away the best visual design thus far. I definitely echo the sentiment on the side vents—they look dated. The feet look elegant, but if they were dropped for M1 style feet it could still be a pretty case if there are issues with thickness.
Having perforated sides or the front is something that could still be done tastefully as well. The M1 looks excellent with them, and the black front could look tasteful with them as well, though you'd probably have to move the i/o to the top rather than the vertical stack on the side.
Keep up the great work!
Having perforated sides or the front is something that could still be done tastefully as well. The M1 looks excellent with them, and the black front could look tasteful with them as well, though you'd probably have to move the i/o to the top rather than the vertical stack on the side.
Keep up the great work!
Phuncz
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,630
I'm happy to see so much interest in the 2B design. But it does need the sculpted feet to stand out. Maybe another design could work but just regular discs won't cut it.
The suggestion of rotating the board 90 degrees so the rear I/O is on the bottom, also seems appealing, allowing to manage cables. But it would also mean most of the airflow needs to come from the front.
But a perforated black front panel might be a nice solution, hiding the holes visually, a little.
Necere, I have a PowerMac G5 within arm's reach if you need any measurements or high res photos. Just send me a PM, I'd be glad to be able to help out.
The suggestion of rotating the board 90 degrees so the rear I/O is on the bottom, also seems appealing, allowing to manage cables. But it would also mean most of the airflow needs to come from the front.
But a perforated black front panel might be a nice solution, hiding the holes visually, a little.
Necere, I have a PowerMac G5 within arm's reach if you need any measurements or high res photos. Just send me a PM, I'd be glad to be able to help out.