Joop's First Photoshoot- ZHP/Florida Scenery

[JupiterBMW]

Ok folks.. So as some of you know, we recently purchased our first DSLR. We went with the Canon T5i with the 18-135mm kit lens. So far we've been playing around with it a bit, but nothing crazy. My goal is to learn how to use it and really start taking some good shots. Ideally, I'd like to shoot nature/scenery, and cars.

So, this morning I had the idea to go out and try to capture a few nice shots of the ZHP (since I haven't done ANY pics in her current state), and maybe play around with the camera a bit. Well, I had baby with me and so not a TON of time. So, take a look and let me know what you think... Please don't critique too much, this is literally the 2nd-3rd time I've used the camera...

Also, I took some shots that looked amazing through the viewfinder, but they're extremely washed out. I posted a couple of them.. Can anyone tell me what I did wrong here? I think I had the ISO way too high (6400)... Of course, I didn't know it was adjustable in the setting I was in.

Ugh, new guy FTL... Either way, would love to hear comments.

8596

8598

8595

8597

8599

[JupiterBMW]

Ok, here are the ones I messed up. They looked amazing through the viewfinder... Not so much afterward, and baby was getting fussy so I didn't stick around to play with the settings and try again. The first one had the car/grills perfectly focused, and the water/yachts in the background blurred out a little. Lots of great color with the water, trees, boats, etc... The second one had the purple flowers up the side in focus, and again, the stuff in back (car with fountain) blurred, but still very visible. Again, I want to learn to shoot nature/scenery, so this was something I was really looking forward to seeing... And the third one was the car in focus with the fountain behind, washed out... Needed to move the car forward more to block the one way sign too, but didn't have as much time as I would've liked... Anyway...

8600

8602

8601

[UdubBadger]

lol at the outtakes


nice work Jon, car looks great!

[derbo]

Nice pics!

Try taking pics without the car being in shadows or half in a shadow. It will bring out the car to be more of the picture's centerpoint. I'm not photographer but I find the shadows distracting on a car.

[UdubBadger]

was also my 1st thought but wasn't sure this was C&C approved till I reread the 1st post. :)

[Ryans323i]

As an observer, i give my opinion. But know i have no professional knowledge.

Watch for shadows as others have said. Pic 3, i couldn't figure out the subject. (i know it's the car, but there's a lot of distractions.) Really like pic 2.

And you have great subject matter, so practicing. Maybe shoot earlier in the day or in the evening.

Sent from my walkie talkie.

[UdubBadger]

try not parking your car right up on the stuff but leaving some space between it for visual difference in the distances - basically more DOF separation from the car and background.

[JupiterBMW]

Hey guys, thanks for the comments. First things, I definitely understand the issue with shadows. From what I've found (and maybe I just need to learn more, well, I know I need to learn more, but specifically more about lighting) is that photographing my car is near impossible because in sunlight, its so damn bright that everything else is barely distinguishable...

So, I went out this morning with intent of photographing in the shade, and you see, even at 9:30am I couldn't get full shade anywhere. Perhaps I will have to try again soon.

Ryan- Yes, I see your point about the "subject" in the 3rd photo, but was mostly just trying to capture it all. Maybe I need more pointers on shooting "scenery"...

I have lots to learn. :facepalm

[C Withers Media]

Any object behind the car that appears to come out of the roof is affectionately known in our house as a "Carsicle stick". You will learn, just get on and around photography pages and ask questions.

Rule number 1 in this game is be prepared for someone who knows what they are talking about to light your ass on fire with criticism. They don't mean harm, they want to help you improve.

What they are saying and how harsh you will perceive it are often at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Looks like a great time, and you are pressing the button. That right there puts you ahead of 90% of the people on the planet. You are pressing the button.

[JupiterBMW]

Hahhaha, Casey, thanks for the comments. I take zero offense to anything said, I really welcome all the criticism, even the witty slang that you pros use. To be honest, I agree, the flagpole coming out of the car looked kind of silly. More time and not having the baby would've made this all a lot easier, at least more time to review the shots on the camera and play around.

Thanks again for the help. I really would love to find a better location on the intracoastal where I can see the water/boats, but without so many other distractions... I'll keep working on this. Thanks again and stay tuned. :)

[UdubBadger]

Any object behind the car that appears to come out of the roof is affectionately known in our house as a "Carsicle stick". You will learn, just get on and around photography pages and ask questions.

Rule number 1 in this game is be prepared for someone who knows what they are talking about to light your ass on fire with criticism. They don't mean harm, they want to help you improve.

What they are saying and how harsh you will perceive it are often at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Looks like a great time, and you are pressing the button. That right there puts you ahead of 90% of the people on the planet. You are pressing the button.

This guy knows what's up.


- Goin' H.A.M. Mobile

[MooseX]

not bad. obviously a quality camera. I like what you did with the drivers side kidney...except the blue isn't Rondel Blue..still I like it and the shots aren't bad at all. Better than my not worth posting pics

[MiniD]

not bad. obviously a quality camera. I like what you did with the drivers side kidney...except the blue isn't Rondel Blue..still I like it and the shots aren't bad at all. Better than my not worth posting pics

It's not suppose to be roundel blue.

The pictures look good for your first time out, man! Only way to get better is practice practice!

[DasMechaniKer]

Good shots for sure. Just gotta keep taking pictures until you find out what works. Def look at the pictures when you are taking them. There is a time of day when the sun isn't up BUT it's lighting things. That's when I have to go out to do my wildflower stuff. Reflections kill wildflower shots. As they'll do on your white car. I've only got about an hour of that light in the NC mountains and it's way before 930.

Just try getting out a little earlier and you'll be fine.

[Tnhl1989]

Hey Joop,

So take this quick read http://www.morguefile.com/classroom. Should take a good hour or so.

After that get a trial version of get http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html or you could find a torrent version.

Overall I would suggest setting the camera in the following settings for photos down there. Low ISO since it's sunny there. I wouldn't step over 600 iso down in FL. As for settings on the camera I would say try out P or AV mode to start. Always try to get the white balance correct before hand so you don't have to do much post work. Auto white balance does a pretty good job already. Also shoot in RAW mode :P That's all I got for now.

[JupiterBMW]

not bad. obviously a quality camera. I like what you did with the drivers side kidney...except the blue isn't Rondel Blue..still I like it and the shots aren't bad at all. Better than my not worth posting pics

Hah, thanks man. As for the kidney stripes, they are the new version M colors. Light blue, dark blue, red. And when you see them in person, the colors match perfectly.


Good shots for sure. Just gotta keep taking pictures until you find out what works. Def look at the pictures when you are taking them. There is a time of day when the sun isn't up BUT it's lighting things. That's when I have to go out to do my wildflower stuff. Reflections kill wildflower shots. As they'll do on your white car. I've only got about an hour of that light in the NC mountains and it's way before 930.

Just try getting out a little earlier and you'll be fine.

Yeah, I'm learning this for sure. Down here, the only time to get the shots when its "light" out but not blinding is at like 7am. Its 7:50am now and already the sun is blasting through the hedge behind our house... I'd have to actually plan to get up earlier and stuff with the baby.


Hey Joop,

So take this quick read http://www.morguefile.com/classroom. Should take a good hour or so.

After that get a trial version of get http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html or you could find a torrent version.

Overall I would suggest setting the camera in the following settings for photos down there. Low ISO since it's sunny there. I wouldn't step over 600 iso down in FL. As for settings on the camera I would say try out P or AV mode to start. Always try to get the white balance correct before hand so you don't have to do much post work. Auto white balance does a pretty good job already. Also shoot in RAW mode :P That's all I got for now.

For sure. That's the same link you texted me, but I haven't had a chance to look at it yet. Will do though. And speaking of RAW mode, still have no idea what that's all about. :shifty :biggrin




Thanks again guys!

[DasMechaniKer]

If you can't get out early try to shoot your car behind something that blocks out the light, or wait for an overcast day. Clouds are a great diffuser, but the sun has to be blocked almost completely for it to work.

[JupiterBMW]

If you can't get out early try to shoot your car behind something that blocks out the light, or wait for an overcast day. Clouds are a great diffuser, but the sun has to be blocked almost completely for it to work.

Yeah, that's kind of what I was going for honestly. I knew if I went early, I'd be able to use the trees to block most of the sun. All of those shots are facing West... And yes, overcast day would be perfect. I promise, my next go around will be better! :biggrin

[DasMechaniKer]

It's all good man. You did better than most for a first time out!!

[ELCID86]

+1 on Light Room and shooting in RAW so you have more options in post processing. Took me awhile to figure this out. I think the LR5 beta is still free to try. There are quite a few free resources online for learning LR. I plan to take a class to kick it up a notch. I also use Photoshop Element (a lot cheaper than PS6 and will remain as a stand-alone install vice the subscription model Adobe is moving to). As others have said--keep shooting.

[johnrando]

www.lynda.com.

Online photography tutorials, etc.

[UdubBadger]

^ great resource


- Goin' H.A.M. Mobile

[Tnhl1989]

Here you are Joop :)

http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/0/0300010910/01/eos-rebelt5i-700d-qg-en.pdf

Under Image-Recording Quality. If you don't want to do post processing I would say shoot in L if you do want to touch up the photos a bit shoot in RAW. If you are unsure shoot in RAW+L.

[330i ZHP]

Nice pics!

Try taking pics without the car being in shadows or half in a shadow. It will bring out the car to be more of the picture's centerpoint. I'm not photographer but I find the shadows distracting on a car.

+1

[JupiterBMW]

Here you are Joop :)

http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/0/0300010910/01/eos-rebelt5i-700d-qg-en.pdf

Under Image-Recording Quality. If you don't want to do post processing I would say shoot in L if you do want to touch up the photos a bit shoot in RAW. If you are unsure shoot in RAW+L.

Thanks man. As for the formats, yeah, I know how to change them, but I still need to research RAW and see exactly what it is versus JPG and the differences. I'll do some reading and play around... :) Thanks for the tips and links... The wife and I have a lot of reading to do!

[ELCID86]

Download LR and watch a few tutorial. You will be amazed him much you can do with RAW files. Only way to go in my humble opinion.


Shawn in VA.
Via thumbs and Tapatalk.

[JupiterBMW]

Roger that, will do.

[wsmeyer]

Shoot RAW. I really don't think you're going to hear much debate on that one

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[UdubBadger]

Ya know raw is great for tuning images but tbh it's not the end all be all of takin photos. You can push regular jpgs just as far in post as you can raw, you just need to know how to do it. For 2 of my photo jobs I shot in jpg only and in both have come some of my best looking work that wasn't even edited. Just saying raw is great but it's not gonna make sub par images stellar. 90% of the images quality will come from straight out of camera and the rest is tune up in post.

Basically if you want great images you need to shoot them that way in camera and use post to tweak, not create.


- Goin' H.A.M. Mobile

[wsmeyer]

90% of the images quality will come from straight out of camera and the rest is tune up in post.

Basically if you want great images you need to shoot them that way in camera and use post to tweak, not create.


Exactly. Which is why it is so important to shoot in RAW. If you have the camera compress it into a JPEG and then do any post processing on it, you're inevitably going to have to compress it a second time back into JPEG. Why would anyone intentionally start out crippling the final product?

[Marcus-SanDiego]

Basically if you want great images you need to shoot them that way in camera and use post to tweak, not create.

I've been shooting for less than two years. But I have learned that important point. Get it right in camera.

A turd is a turd. No matter how much post you do in turning a turd into something, know that the turd will only, at best, be just another form of poop.

Learn to be a great editor and critic of your own work. When you do that, you won't waste time even bothering to work up an image that doesn't pass muster -- and never will.

[Tnhl1989]

I've been shooting for less than two years. But I have learned that important point. Get it right in camera.

A turd is a turd. No matter how much post you do in turning a turd into something, know that the turd will only, at best, be just another form of poop.

Learn to be a great editor and critic of your own work. When you do that, you won't waste time even bothering to work up an image that doesn't pass muster -- and never will.

I have always been told that and that it is true to get it right in the camera the first time. I always end up keeping only 1-4 photos out of a batch of 50 or so. Overtime practice will make perfect and being able to only take photos that you will keep would allow you to fine tune your skills. Overall it eliminates time in post processing. :)

[Marcus-SanDiego]

Ya know raw is great for tuning images but tbh it's not the end all be all of takin photos. You can push regular jpgs just as far in post as you can raw, you just need to know how to do it.

As to your first sentence, I agree. But I agree because the focus of that sentence is on taking photographs. It's not the be-all end-all of taking photos. Correct. Just as you said, the key is getting it right in camera (where you compose, etc.).

However, where we disagree is in your comment regarding pushing a compressed JPEG "as far in post as you can RAW." When I first starting shooting (August 2011), I was unsure about JPEG v. RAW. As a result, I took shots with both formats. A couple of things were really obvious to me. One, the RAW image almost invariably looked flat compared to the JPEG file. Two, the JPEG file (at 100%) almost invariably had artifacts in it. No matter how much you try, you are not going to turn jagged edges into sharp, crisp lines. The best I could do was smooth them out. But that merely gave it a softer look. (Additionally, I cannot undo sharpening that has been done in camera; the detail spectrum of the RAW file is simply not available to those who choose to have the camera generate a JPEG file.)

As for RAW, the flat look was easily dealt with in post. Not only did I have more control over color and white balance (which is especially useful in a location like Antelope Canyon), but the detail was preserved in the RAW file, even if it did start out with a flatter look.

I shoot, almost exclusively, landscapes. Most of my images will be printed big. I'm not willing to take a chance on starting out with a JPEG that the camera has already applied an algorithm to. That processing in camera throws out details that were not used in the JPEG conversion. Those details can NEVER be recovered. Were they details that I may have wanted? What could I have done with those details if I had left the image in RAW? These are all questions rendered moot by turning your files over to in-camera processing.

Here's my conclusion: Seth, you turned some JPEG shots into some of your best work. I would submit that, assuming your post work is solid, you could have gone even farther with a RAW file. No matter what, you would have been working with every bit of data (RAW) that your camera was capable of producing. With the JPEG file, you were already working with a depleted file. From a logic standpoint, and everything else being equal (post work of the camera versus a photographer), I would find it difficult for anyone to argue that a compressed JPEG base is not going to be inferior to a finished RAW image (even if the additional post work of the JPEG file is done by a Photoshop master).

(If we're going to continue on with this discussion -- JPEG v. RAW -- we should probably start a new thread. I'd love to discuss.)

[C Withers Media]

I've been shooting for less than two years. But I have learned that important point. Get it right in camera.

A turd is a turd. No matter how much post you do in turning a turd into something, know that the turd will only, at best, be just another form of poop.

Learn to be a great editor and critic of your own work. When you do that, you won't waste time even bothering to work up an image that doesn't pass muster -- and never will.

I've been cloned.

[Marcus-SanDiego]

^^^^ protégé.

[UdubBadger]

Mark the point was that you need to get it right in camera 1st before anything else matters. I totally agree with what you are saying which is why I shoot raw exclusively now. I am just saying depending upon what level you are at it could make much less of a difference and in fact in some cases be advantageous for someone just learning post to be able to shoot jpg over raw. The white balance options you have in raw are corrective of small inconsistencies you get out of camera balance, but if you shoot it properly in camera no correction is needed ( whether setting to appropriate WB instead of auto or using grey card for custom ).

Again just making a case for the "prosumers" out there who don't blow stuff up for gallery sized prints that site option can work well. Shooting RAW isn't always required. A great case though that you can't get stuff back so if your post skills progress you'll always be stuck with the jpg version.



- Goin' H.A.M. Mobile

[Marcus-SanDiego]

Agree that not everyone needs to shoot RAW. And for certain genres (sports shooting comes straight to mind), it would be a nightmare if you are trying to speed through a scene.

But whether you're a hack or a professional, if you're shooting a static scene (like a landscape), it rarely makes sense to shoot JPEG. It does make sense, though, if it's for personal use and you're going to post your photos online.

Your comment about making the adjustments in camera before you click is interesting. That's just tweaking ahead of the photo rather than after it's been captured. I always wish those tweaking ahead of time all the best. It's simply more difficult to get the settings just right, looking at a 3-inch screen, than it is using my computer and monitor at home.

Additionally, how in the world does the photographer have the time to make micro adjustments in camera, when the conditions are so dynamic? I don't have the time to make the fine-tune adjustments in the field when the conditions warrant my 100% attention to what's going on in front of the lens. With the RAW file, I'm simply not going to have to worry about missing shots in the field. I can make the fine-tune adjustments at home -- to the winning image that I captured (because I didn't miss it due to twiddling with the settings in the camera menu).

[UdubBadger]

Agree that not everyone needs to shoot RAW. And for certain genres (sports shooting comes straight to mind), it would be a nightmare if you are trying to speed through a scene.

But whether you're a hack or a professional, if you're shooting a static scene (like a landscape), it rarely makes sense to shoot JPEG. It does make sense, though, if it's for personal use and you're going to post your photos online.

Again, plenty of good points but they don't apply to everyone in every condition. At work we shoot JPG small because of a file size issue. Much like an action shooter or someone just snapping a few pics of their cars (like Joop) who isn't going to process them much, it can very much work out in their favor. The algorithm you (and I) don't want to mess up the RAW images for further processing is actually doing these people a favor and essentially very lightly processing the image for them. Correct?



Your comment about making the adjustments in camera before you click is interesting. That's just tweaking ahead of the photo rather than after it's been captured. I always wish those tweaking ahead of time all the best. It's simply more difficult to get the settings just right, looking at a 3-inch screen, than it is using my computer and monitor at home.

I can appreciate where you are coming from as you have said many times, you shoot landscapes but not everyone does and that isn't the full range of photography that everyone uses day to day. You shoot exclusively in natural light, so I understand that condition is forever changing... but a huge majority also shoot with strobes in both changing and constant lighting conditions (such as what Casey and I do) as well as in natural light that is constant such as mid day sun (like Jon). By setting your WB to "Flash" you are doing a good majority of the work right there in securing the images color balance in camera when shooting with strobes, as the same when you shoot "sunny" or "shade" or "florescent" when in those conditions. With jpg, you can still adjust these settings manually, just not with the preset functions that appear when working with RAW. If you set them before hand and shoot jpg, and us a custom with a grey card and histogram, that's about as close to perfect as you can get and in controlled lighting probably the optimal way to shoot.


Additionally, how in the world does the photographer have the time to make micro adjustments in camera, when the conditions are so dynamic? I don't have the time to make the fine-tune adjustments in the field when the conditions warrant my 100% attention to what's going on in front of the lens. With the RAW file, I'm simply not going to have to worry about missing shots in the field. I can make the fine-tune adjustments at home -- to the winning image that I captured (because I didn't miss it due to twiddling with the settings in the camera menu).

Again I understand your mentality but I also see it coming from someone who shoots something very specific with very specific requirements. I've read your write ups about how to catch a flare at the right minute you might only have 10-15 sec windows. That totally understandable why you would want to do most of the work after the fact so you don't screw up something you can't go back and fix with the actual scene because you were distracted. But again that isn't how or what everyone requires to shoot, especially just a hobbyist who wants to shoot his car as in Jon's case.

Jon has a lot to learn, but he has time. He has time to line up his images scenery by moving the car around, moving the tripod around and refining images by doing it over and over changing things till it looks right. Jon will have time to decide that it's a cloudy day instead of a bright sunny one so he can set his white balance accordingly. Jon will have time to learn how to look through the lens and start seeing the smaller details of his shots (like trees coming out of sunroofs and such) and get better at the basics. He will also have time to learn LR/PS and how to get more out of his images. My point was that while he is learning, his results might look just as good if he shot in jpg and learned how to work his images in camera more so that just relying on PS as so many people do and end up using it as a crutch.

With that being said, once Jon begins to master those skills, he will undoubtedly benefit from shooting in RAW to then take his photos to the next level.

And FYI, I know you (Mark) won't take any of this discussion as mean or in the wrong way but just wanted to let everyone else know its not meant in that fashion. It's just a debate from 2 photographers with different points of view and reference. :)

[kakashi169]

Nice shots! Love it!

Why does it seem like everyone has those splitters except me? LOL

[danewilson77]

I'm with you Bro. I think they look ryce.

HTC DNA ON TT4 BETA, WILLIAMSBURG, VA

[JupiterBMW]

I'm with you Bro. I think they look ryce.

HTC DNA ON TT4 BETA, WILLIAMSBURG, VA

Silence! I kill you! :ninja

[danewilson77]

Ha! Just jelly.

HTC DNA ON TT4 BETA, WILLIAMSBURG, VA

[JupiterBMW]

Ok, took a couple more shots today. Honestly, I wasn't impressed with any of them. But, I figured I'd post a few pics of each just for kicks...

First one is a little critter I saw in the bushes right before washing my car this morning...

8782

The next two are pics I got while my brother were out cruising today. Wanted to try some parking garage shots because the sun was right overhead... Wasn't too pleased with the yellowish tint it gave the pics. Anyway, just a couple shots..

8783

8784

[ELCID86]

Nice bokeh in #1. Lighting is a challenge in the car pics. Keep shooting!


Shawn in VA.
Via thumbs and Tapatalk.

[danewilson77]

Looking good Joop :thumbsup

[JupiterBMW]

Thanks guys, still messing around.

[330i ZHP]

I am not sure about Canon - but with Nikon, the kit lens is TOTAL CRAP - I wasn't able to get a clear picture with it

[DasMechaniKer]

Ok, took a couple more shots today. Honestly, I wasn't impressed with any of them. But, I figured I'd post a few pics of each just for kicks...

First one is a little critter I saw in the bushes right before washing my car this morning...

8782

The next two are pics I got while my brother were out cruising today. Wanted to try some parking garage shots because the sun was right overhead... Wasn't too pleased with the yellowish tint it gave the pics. Anyway, just a couple shots..

8783

8784

These are good Jon!!! What you need to focus on is NOT to have intense light and intense dark in the photo. If this occurs then your camera tries to get the brights correct and everything else looks like it's in the shadows, or you get the darks right and the bright lights in the photo end up looking like Heaven's gates.

Now that car shot may not look like that to your naked eye, but your camera can't filter light like your eye can. Maybe next time park the cars in the center of the garage and shoot lengthwise so all you have in the shot are the cars and the garage, nothing outside. This way your exposure will be more even and your picture will come out with nice even color.


I am not sure about Canon - but with Nikon, the kit lens is TOTAL CRAP - I wasn't able to get a clear picture with it

There are a lot of people that say kit lenses are garbage. I've also seen many talented photographers take wonderful shots with kit lenses. I've also seen a guy take a shot with an iphone that looked pretty incredible recently. It's not the camera, or the lens, that makes a photographer.

[UdubBadger]

speaking of ryce... :shifty


j/k

pic 1 is good!

pics 2/3 aren't bad but I think the AF is off a little, they look a little blurry to me. What were your settings?

[C Withers Media]

If you want to kill the yellow tint, adjust your white balance settings.

Secondly, the kit lens is crap talk........Well without trying to sound pretentious, I'd love to have a go round with it and show you what it is truly capable of.

[Tnhl1989]

Something like this?

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=25

[DasMechaniKer]

Secondly, the kit lens is crap talk........Well without trying to sound pretentious, I'd love to have a go round with it and show you what it is truly capable of.

I bet you'd do quite well.

ALL of the photos I took at the meet were with the 18-55mm kit lens. I haven't figured out what focal lengths I typically shoot at the wide end of things so I haven't dropped any cash on a higher end lens as of yet. The last pic I took of that waterfall in the Photo of the day thread was also with the same lens.

I'm no pro but those shots are pretty good with glass you can get for 100 bucks.

[330i ZHP]

If you want to kill the yellow tint, adjust your white balance settings.

Secondly, the kit lens is crap talk........Well without trying to sound pretentious, I'd love to have a go round with it and show you what it is truly capable of.

I said I didn't know about the Canon - but you are welcome to try out the Nikon kit lens...

[danewilson77]

I said I didn't know about the Canon - but you are welcome to try out the Nikon kit lens...

I think Casey could shoot pretty clean with a lense, mirror and a piece of film inside a milk carton.

This is all he's saying Stu.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpigCaeKkEs

[JupiterBMW]

Wow, awesome video...

[330i ZHP]

gotcha

[330i ZHP]

and that video - I would like to see the pics on computer and put on paper

[Tnhl1989]

It's all about light. At least that's what I gather from the video :P

[DasMechaniKer]

Yeah, Casey shoots Nikon too, so I'm sure those kit lenses are comparable to the Canon kit lenses.

[C Withers Media]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TOoGjtSy7xY