Lockheed Martin Real3d card

36 views
Skip to first unread message

Trips

unread,
Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96
to

Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
>
> All:
>
> Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.
>
> The chipset is very capable.
>
> It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
> 33 million oixel rate
> 750,000 polygons /sec
> 192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).
>
> Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.
>
> I have asked for additional information.

$2799 to be a beta tester... sign me up today!!

Trips

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96
to

Trips:

R U saying the card will go for $2,799.???

rol...@earthlink.netb

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96
to

All:

Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.

The chipset is very capable.

It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
33 million oixel rate
750,000 polygons /sec
192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).

Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.


I have asked for additional information.

Anyone know how closed this power has come to the maximum through put of
the PCI bus??

rola...@earthlink.net

Andrew Dayton

unread,
Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96
to

Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
>
> Trips wrote:
> >
> > Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> > >
> > > All:
> > >
> > > Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.
> > >
> > > The chipset is very capable.
> > >
> > > It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
> > > 33 million oixel rate
> > > 750,000 polygons /sec
> > > 192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).
> > >
> > > Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.
> > >
> > > I have asked for additional information.
> >
> > $2799 to be a beta tester... sign me up today!!
> >
> > Trips
>
> Trips:
>
> R U saying the card will go for $2,799.???
>
> rol...@earthlink.netb

I work at Lockheed Martin Real3D and I believe the card in question is
for industrial applications. However, there is a chipset in development
that is for 3D graphics acceleration on PCs that may be out by the end
of '97 that will use AGP as opposed to PCI.

Andy

PS I am NOT an official spokesman for Lockheed Martin Real3D. Any
views expressed are my own and I cannot guarantee the accuracy of the
information I give.

ZENALITTLE

unread,
Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96
to

I am surprised the Fill rate is so low, and the card is not due out for
another 6 months at best-surprising. I mean the card is faster than
another 3D card out there.....except the Voodoo...good news for voodoo
owners and bad news for intel and Andy since Grove and Co. buddied up with
Lockheed on this new AGP/Real combo. Oh well....for once good things came
to those that didn't have to wait, if you have Voodoo.

Zen

Boomer

unread,
Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96
to

"Roland N. Cataldo" <"rola...@earthlink.net"@earthlink.net> wrote:

>All:

>Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.

>The chipset is very capable.

>It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
>33 million oixel rate
>750,000 polygons /sec
>192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).

>Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.


>I have asked for additional information.

>Anyone know how closed this power has come to the maximum through put of
>the PCI bus??

>rola...@earthlink.net

I've seen demos of this bad boy and it looks *great*. They've
basically put their aerospace sim H/W on a chip. Unfortunately,
they're saying it's for commercial use (arcades) and last I heard
(last year), the price for the card was about 2 grand.

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96
to

Andrew Dayton wrote:
>
> Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> >
> > Trips wrote:
> > >
> > > Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All:
> > > >
> > > > Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.
> > > >
> > > > The chipset is very capable.
> > > >
> > > > It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
> > > > 33 million oixel rate
> > > > 750,000 polygons /sec
> > > > 192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).
> > > >
> > > > Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.
> > > >
> > > > I have asked for additional information.
> > >
> > > $2799 to be a beta tester... sign me up today!!
> > >
> > > Trips
> >
> > Trips:
> >
> > R U saying the card will go for $2,799.???
> >
> > rol...@earthlink.netb
>
> I work at Lockheed Martin Real3D and I believe the card in question is
> for industrial applications. However, there is a chipset in development
> that is for 3D graphics acceleration on PCs that may be out by the end
> of '97 that will use AGP as opposed to PCI.
>
> Andy
>
> PS I am NOT an official spokesman for Lockheed Martin Real3D. Any
> views expressed are my own and I cannot guarantee the accuracy of the
> information I give.


Andy:

Thank u for input. I think the REal3d/100 is for the pcc and the 1000
is for the commercial console game.

rola...@earthlink.net

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96
to

Boomer wrote:

>
> "Roland N. Cataldo" <"rola...@earthlink.net"@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >All:
>
> >Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.
>
> >The chipset is very capable.
>
> >It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
> >33 million oixel rate
> >750,000 polygons /sec
> >192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).
>
> >Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.
>
> >I have asked for additional information.
>
> >Anyone know how closed this power has come to the maximum through put of
> >the PCI bus??
>
> >rola...@earthlink.net
>
> I've seen demos of this bad boy and it looks *great*. They've
> basically put their aerospace sim H/W on a chip. Unfortunately,
> they're saying it's for commercial use (arcades) and last I heard
> (last year), the price for the card was about 2 grand.


Boomer:


2K!!! I think the model REal3d/100 is less than $1K.

Rola...@earthlink.net

Andrew Dayton

unread,
Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96
to

Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
>
> Andrew Dayton wrote:
> >
> > Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> > >
> > > Trips wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All:
> > > > >
> > > > > Chek out Lockheed Martin's website at www.real3d.com.
> > > > >
> > > > > The chipset is very capable.
> > > > >
> > > > > It has a 100 mflop geometry engine.
> > > > > 33 million oixel rate
> > > > > 750,000 polygons /sec
> > > > > 192 texture maps /sec (12 x 128 mipmapped).
> > > > >
> > > > > Potential problem.... supports any WIndows NT API and Open GL.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have asked for additional information.
> > > >
> > > > $2799 to be a beta tester... sign me up today!!
> > > >
> > > > Trips
> > >
> > > Trips:
> > >
> > > R U saying the card will go for $2,799.???
> > >
> > > rol...@earthlink.netb
> >
> > I work at Lockheed Martin Real3D and I believe the card in question is
> > for industrial applications. However, there is a chipset in development
> > that is for 3D graphics acceleration on PCs that may be out by the end
> > of '97 that will use AGP as opposed to PCI.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > PS I am NOT an official spokesman for Lockheed Martin Real3D. Any
> > views expressed are my own and I cannot guarantee the accuracy of the
> > information I give.
>
> Andy:
>
> Thank u for input. I think the REal3d/100 is for the pcc and the 1000
> is for the commercial console game.
>
> rola...@earthlink.net

Roland,

You are right. By the way, they just got the first board in for testing
(Read3D/100) this past week. I have no information on when it might be
available. The card will support OpenGL and any Direct3D software
compatible API.

The Real3D Pro-100 is for professional real time simulations. (ie, kinda
expensive).

Andy

Andrew Dayton

unread,
Oct 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/26/96
to

> The Real3D Pro-100 is for professional real time simulations. (ie, kinda
> expensive).

Sorry. That's the Real3D Pro-1000.

Andy

enzo

unread,
Oct 27, 1996, 2:00:00 AM10/27/96
to

> >
> > I've seen demos of this bad boy and it looks *great*. They've
> > basically put their aerospace sim H/W on a chip. Unfortunately,
> > they're saying it's for commercial use (arcades) and last I heard
> > (last year), the price for the card was about 2 grand.
>
> Boomer:
>
> 2K!!! I think the model REal3d/100 is less than $1K.

It's about $500 in basic configuration, and can go as high as $2k
as you add RAM to it (according to the Real3D guys at Comdex 95)
of course, RAM prices *have* fallen since then...

Unfortunately, Real3d is being targeted at high-end OpenGL users
so while it will have the really nice look of the Sega Model 2
board, it just won't be as practical as the 3dfx based boards.
At least 3dfx gives you roughly the same performance for $200 less
if OpenGL in a window isn't too important.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Mouneimne | "We are not afraid of the Russians,
en...@outwest.com | we are afraid of their helicopters."
| - Muhajeddin soldier
---CS-Anime-Bab5-SegaAM-Mtn_Bikes-RPGs-Newton-Ducatis-Hk-Glock-Rally-

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96
to enzo


Enzo:

WHere did u get the info on the Lockheed Martin Real3d/100? I knew it
wouild be under $1,000.00. It also supports Windows NT. To bad it does
not support WIndows 95 and 3dr. Falcon 4 will be 3dr???

Also it, according to what I have read, ca n put out 750,000
polygons/secc. And over 33 million pixels/sec. THe only two other
boards I think might be worth looking at are the TAZ (1.4 million
polys/se) and the VIrge/Vr/100. The virge (3d labs Permedia Falon) an
produce 30 million textured poly/sec. I do not know what the pixel rate
is. However, it has a 220 \ramdac for pixel through put.

THe virge/vr supports Open Gl, Windows 95 Direct3d, CGL and 3D studio
Max.

If u have any additional info ... please post.

I also agree that the Lockheed Martin Real3d/100 without additional api
support it will be 0f very little use to us gamers.

rola...@earthlink.net

enzo

unread,
Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96
to

Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
> Enzo:
>
> WHere did u get the info on the Lockheed Martin Real3d/100? I knew it
> wouild be under $1,000.00. It also supports Windows NT. To bad it does
> not support WIndows 95 and 3dr. Falcon 4 will be 3dr???

I already explained that this info is from Real3d employees at Comdex
95.
I also received e-mail a couple days ago from a Real3d employee that
continues to confirm my statements - if you still don't believe me,
I can forward it to you.

> Also it, according to what I have read, ca n put out 750,000
> polygons/secc. And over 33 million pixels/sec. THe only two other
> boards I think might be worth looking at are the TAZ (1.4 million
> polys/se) and the VIrge/Vr/100. The virge (3d labs Permedia Falon) an
> produce 30 million textured poly/sec. I do not know what the pixel rate
> is. However, it has a 220 \ramdac for pixel through put.

Beware the numbers. I have my doubts about the Taz. Permedia's chip is
supposed
to be pretty good, but my money's on Orchid's R3D. That is, if they can
ever
get the darn thing to stores.



> THe virge/vr supports Open Gl, Windows 95 Direct3d, CGL and 3D studio
> Max.

The OpenGL/3DStudio stuff is only relevant IMHO if the chip supports
3d-in-a-window



> If u have any additional info ... please post.
>
> I also agree that the Lockheed Martin Real3d/100 without additional api
> support it will be 0f very little use to us gamers.

I think it may have originally had some game application, but when it
became apparent that they were going to be coming in too late and too
expensive they probably decided to shift gears and provide an affordable
high-end modeling board.

The Real3d/IntelAGP system coming in the future might be a different
story.
All the talk so far has been about the PCI version, which might be a
different animal.

Matt Shaw

unread,
Oct 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/29/96
to


I can tell you from experience that the 3DFx boards are brutally fast.
Most of the MS Direct 3D demos that would run between 1 and 10 fps in
640x480 16bit full screen, now run 60fps with better texturing. Phew!
--Matt


Andrew Dayton

unread,
Oct 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/29/96
to

> The Real3d/IntelAGP system coming in the future might be a different
> story.
> All the talk so far has been about the PCI version, which might be a
> different animal.

I am working at Real3D and the R3D-100 is targeted for high end users,
not gamers. The Real3D/Intel AGP you mentioned is being worked on (by
me, for one :) ) and it should kick some butt. It is intended for
gamers.

Andy

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96
to


Andy:

I read AGP will permit a 450% increase in data through put over the PCI?
Out in July 0f 97?

rola...@earthlink.net

enzo

unread,
Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96
to

> >
> > >
> > > > The Real3d/IntelAGP system coming in the future might be a different
> > > > story.
> > > > All the talk so far has been about the PCI version, which might be a
> > > > different animal.
> > >
> > > I am working at Real3D and the R3D-100 is targeted for high end users,
> > > not gamers. The Real3D/Intel AGP you mentioned is being worked on (by
> > > me, for one :) ) and it should kick some butt. It is intended for
> > > gamers.
> > >
> > > Andy

Well, thanks at least for giving us some hope that there will be a
Real3d solution made for gamers at least some time in the future.
I hope that when it does debut it won't be too late for high-end
gamers, and too expensive for mainstream gamers. If it can deliver
performance approaching the Model 3 board, I'll be there in spades.

Best of luck to you and the rest of the Real3D team,

Andrew Dayton

unread,
Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96
to

Roland N. Cataldo wrote:
>
> Andrew Dayton wrote:
> >
> > > The Real3d/IntelAGP system coming in the future might be a different
> > > story.
> > > All the talk so far has been about the PCI version, which might be a
> > > different animal.
> >
> > I am working at Real3D and the R3D-100 is targeted for high end users,
> > not gamers. The Real3D/Intel AGP you mentioned is being worked on (by
> > me, for one :) ) and it should kick some butt. It is intended for
> > gamers.
> >
> > Andy
>
> Andy:
>
> I read AGP will permit a 450% increase in data through put over the PCI?
> Out in July 0f 97?
>
> rola...@earthlink.net

The PCI bus runs at 33 MHZ and the AGP bus will run at 132 MHZ or four
times faster. This does not mean that frame rates will increase by four
times. I wish I could say more but don't feel it is appropriate. It is
not my place to say when this product will be ready unless it becomes
public info.

Andy

Ted Kern

unread,
Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96
to

First, let me start off by saying I am going to be buying a Voodoo card.
For low end comsumer grade flight sims and such, the Voodoo looks like
about the best thing available. Second, I am not necessarily responding
to just you, because there seems to be a hell of a lot of confusion
about Lockheed Martin's graphics accelerators. I have been seeing posts
all over the place confusing the R3D/100 with the AGP/INTEL project that
L.M. is working on. The R3D/100 is *NOT* the chipset that is being
developed for the AGP/INTEL partnership.

However, since your inference is that the Voodoo is faster than the
R3D/100, I have to say that you are totally dead wrong. While the specs
say that the Voodoo is *capable* of rendering a higher number of pixels
per second, or the same number of polygons per second as the R3D/100,
the specs fail to mention that these are not real world performance
figures any you probably will not ever see the kind of performance that
3Dfx claims to be able to acheive. This does *not* mean that the Voodoo
is not a good (its great actually) card, just that the game based 3D
accelerator companies (all of them) don't tell you the whole story.

The Voodoo uses a polygon raster processor. This accelerates line and
polygon drawing, rendering, and texture mapping, but does not accelerate
geometry processing (ie vertex transormation like rotate and scale).
Geometry processing on the Voodoo as well as every other consumer (read
game) grade 3D accelerator. Because the cpu must handle the geometry
transforms and such, you will never see anything near what 3Dfx,
Rendition, or any of the other manufacturers claim until cpu's get
significantly faster (by at least an order of magnitude). The 3D
accelerator actually has to wait for the cpu to finish processing before
it can do its thing.

I have yet to see any of the manufacturers post what cpu was plugged
into their accelerator, and what percentage of cpu bandwidth was being
used to produce the numbers that they claim. You can bet that if it was
done on a Pentium 200, that the only task the cpu was handling was
rendering the 3D model that they were benchmarking. For a game,
rendering is only part of the cpu load. The cpu has to handle flight
modelling, enemy AI, environmental variables, weapons modelling, damage
modelling, sound, etc, etc.

The R3D includes both the raster accelerator (see above) and a 100 MFLOP
geometry processing engine. Read that last line again. All geometry
processing data is offloaded from the system cpu and onto the R3D
floating point processor, allowing the cpu to handle more important
tasks. The Voodoo does not have this, and if it were to add a geometry
processor, you would have to more than double the price of the card.

The R3D also allows for up to 8M of texture memory (handled by a
seperate texture processor) which allows not only 24 bit texturemaps
(RGB), but also 32bit maps (RGBA) the additional 8 bits being used for
256 level transparency (Alpha). An addtional 10M can be used for frame
buffer memory, and 5M more for depth buffering.

There are pages and pages of specs on the R3D/100 that show that in the
end, it is a better card than the Voodoo and other consumer and
accelerator cards, but I guess the correct question is, for what? If
the models that are in your scene are fairly low detailed (as almost all
games are - even the real cpu pigs like Back to Bagdhad), then the R3D
would be of little added benefit over something like the Voodoo.
However, when you are doing scenes where the polys are 2x+ times more
than your typical 3D game, the R3D really shines. The R3D is and always
was designed for mid to high end professional type application, where
the R3D/1000 (much much faster than the 100) would be too expensive, or
just plain overkill. I've seen the 1000 and I have to say that it rocks!
I had to wipe the drool from my chin after seeing it at Siggraph (We're
talking military grade simulation equipment there boys, both in
performance and price!)

Now then, as I mentioned before, I'm going be buying the Voodoo for my
home system, where I would be mostly playing games. But, I am looking
at the R3D for use in professional 3D application. More comparible 3D
accelerators would not be Voodoo, Rendition based genre, but more along
the lines of high end GLINT based boards containing Delta geometry
accelerator chips (and I don't mean the low end game base Glint chips,
or even the Permedia for that matter), or possibly the next line from
Symmetric (Glyder series), or Intergraph's new professional accelerator
series.


Ted K.
Shadowbox Graphics
Chicago - where being dead isn't a voting restriction.

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96
to Andrew Dayton


Andy:

U made my day :-))) 132MHZ is incredible. Here is why I am so
interested in pushing for more info on this topi of 3d cards.

I have 1 166 w/ a Hercules Dynamite 128, 32 megs edo ram....

I want to prolong the life of this system by adding the best 3d card
available by Mid December. I anticipate the 4th generation of AGP 3d
cards will be out on or after the Intel/Lockheed/Martin APG is out by
July of 97. I will upgrade to a Merced 400 MHZ 0n a APG mb and I am a
happy man.

rola...@earthlink.net

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96
to ted...@ix.netcom.com
Ted:

I would like to thank u for your time and effort in explaining these
matters. I appreciate this as do all who have an opportunity to read
your e-mail. I guess we will have to wait until the AGP is the hot
topic.

I will probably pick up the Vodoo in December.


Rola...@earthlink.net

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96
to enzo

enzo wrote:
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > The Real3d/IntelAGP system coming in the future might be a different
> > > > > story.
> > > > > All the talk so far has been about the PCI version, which might be a
> > > > > different animal.
> > > >
> > > > I am working at Real3D and the R3D-100 is targeted for high end users,
> > > > not gamers. The Real3D/Intel AGP you mentioned is being worked on (by
> > > > me, for one :) ) and it should kick some butt. It is intended for
> > > > gamers.
> > > >
> > > > Andy
>
> Well, thanks at least for giving us some hope that there will be a
> Real3d solution made for gamers at least some time in the future.
> I hope that when it does debut it won't be too late for high-end
> gamers, and too expensive for mainstream gamers. If it can deliver
> performance approaching the Model 3 board, I'll be there in spades.
>
> Best of luck to you and the rest of the Real3D team,
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Neil Mouneimne | "We are not afraid of the Russians,
> en...@outwest.com | we are afraid of their helicopters."
> | - Muhajeddin soldier
> ---CS-Anime-Bab5-SegaAM-Mtn_Bikes-RPGs-Newton-Ducatis-Hk-Glock-Rally-

Enzo:

Andy just stated the AGP will run at 132 MHZ!!!! I am a happy man.

rola...@earthlink.net

Timothy Barr

unread,
Nov 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM11/1/96
to

Unfortunaely to get the AGP solution will require a new motherboard<sigh>. And
there is USB as well. I wonder how close the performance of the R3D-100
chipset will be to the Real3D AGP chipset. I also wonder if the real reason
for AGP is to get co-processor grade performance with a lower grade chipset
and a more processor intensive connection.

Roland N. Cataldo

unread,
Nov 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM11/1/96
to

Ted: I just posted a new artile on the 3dfx Interactive Obsidian. I
would like your comments ... please.

U obviously know a great deal about this subject. It looks like u can
add another daughter card to it to upgrade its potential. THey also
give you test results on a 90 and 166 p/5 systems.

I know, I do explore all options....

roland n. cataldo

rola...@earthlink.net

Ted Kern

unread,
Nov 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM11/2/96
to

Well, first off, I have to say that the obsidian does look impressive.
However, I gathered from 3Dfx's page on the subject that this was a
system designed more for professional type arcade use (see their chart
at www.3dfx.com/products/products.html, and description at
www.3Dfx.com/products/obsidian.html). It is encouraging though that the
Obsidian will support OpenGL, which is what I need for real time
rendered modelling in NT.

They mention scalability on their page, which is a nice thing too. The
higher end Glint cards offer the ability to add multiple Glints and
Delta chips, I don't think there's a limit to the number either. For
more info on that, see if you can find the May 1995 issue of Next
Generation, pages 22-24. There is an article about a company named Tao
systems that does VR stuff with 4 Glint PCI cards (minimum) on their
specialized board (each Glint has up to 32MB RAM and its own PowerPC
603!). They are also exploring the idea of using a 4 board setup for
each eye for some head mounted VR stuff.

I didn't see any information on whether the Obsidian does any geometry
processing, which may not be as important for most games since they tend
to use lower polygon counts, but would be essential for serious
modellers and animators. Here's a quote from their page though,

"Obsidian's Voodoo Graphics engine performs triangle setup and
rasterization -- leaving the game system's host CPU free to perform
geometry and lighting calculations as well as audio and other game
functions..."

Actually this quote on their page tends tells me that it probably
doesn't actually fully process geometry (scales, transforms, rotate,
etc), but leaves that up to the host cpu, which means that under intense
games that use a high cpu load (ie the latest flight sims), you probably
won't see as high performance as their stats claim. I could be wrong
here, as I don't have a detailed spec sheet. Their web page just
doesn't give enough data for me to make an informed decision, and since
I havn't actually seen it, I would hate to speculate too much as to how
it would compare with their other Voodoo products, or with higher end
professional cards like the Lockheed/Martin, Symetric, or Intergraph
cards.

I also didn't see any mention as to a manufacturer's SRP, which I have a
feeling is probably a little higher than what typical consumers will
want to pay. But then again, I talk to people every day who go out and
buy P6-200's with the sole purpose of playing the latest games, so
anything is possible. Me, I think for now I'll go with the Righteous 3D
for home setup, and I'll probably wind up getting a Symetric Glyder or
Lockheed/Martin card for the serious stuff.

Anyway, thanks for pointing the card out to me, I'll have to see if I
can snag some more info on it.

Ted K.
Shadowbox Graphics
Chicago - vote early, vote often

Consistency is the refuge of the uncreative...

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages