Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10   Go Down

Author Topic: Best ISO for IQ280  (Read 61406 times)

Steve Hendrix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1662
    • http://www.captureintegration.com/
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #80 on: July 07, 2015, 06:41:21 pm »

Hi Steve,

I definitively see your point. Thanks for chiming in, but I feel that you would be a very good person to put things straight for the original poster. So I hope you share your knowledge on the issue…

Best regards
Erik



I don't discount what VS says necessarily, but I think what he is trying - perhaps - to communicate is a relatively moot point to some users, who have described how shooting at different ISO and therefore different shutters speeds impacts their work, which means perhaps in some situations ISO 100 and ISO 35 might be a wash, but being able to shoot at ISO 35 may come into play with certain shooting situations. And in that sense, not a case of a manufacturer trying to "cheat" or present some fake benefit.


Steve Hendrix
CI
Logged
Steve Hendrix • 404-543-8475 www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Alpa | Cambo | Sinar | Arca Swiss

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #81 on: July 07, 2015, 08:13:03 pm »

Hi Steve,

I mean no offense and I have no intention to troll here. Would you care to explain why Phase One's CCD digital backs are severely underexposing at higher ISOs when compared against Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras? Did Phase One deliberately bluff to fool the customers? Why can't they be honest to make the manufacturer's ISO match the measured ISO more closely so that the plot can match the nominal line? ISO 1600 of the IQ180 is only as bright as ISO 640 of a Canon/Nikon/Sony. Are they afraid of something?

It's a base-level ISO 25 or 35 back, rated at 100 ISO base to protect the highlights. Thanks to the excellent DR -by the standards of days bygone- the operator had good DR and was still protected against highlight overexpsoure, in other words the correction latitude goes two stops both ways.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #82 on: July 07, 2015, 08:27:56 pm »

It's a base-level ISO 25 or 35 back, rated at 100 ISO base to protect the highlights. Thanks to the excellent DR -by the standards of days bygone- the operator had good DR and was still protected against highlight overexpsoure, in other words the correction latitude goes two stops both ways.

Edmund

Then why do they cease offering as much highlight protection for lower ISO settings such like 35 and 50? Is this a kind of deception? If the user was to trust the numbers from Phase One's ISO settings and do metering accordingly, then ISO 35 has 1.5 stops less protection against highlight than ISO 100 does. Why?
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 08:32:49 pm by voidshatter »
Logged

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #83 on: July 07, 2015, 09:03:58 pm »

Then why do they cease offering as much highlight protection for lower ISO settings such like 35 and 50? Is this a kind of deception? If the user was to trust the numbers from Phase One's ISO settings and do metering accordingly, then ISO 35 has 1.5 stops less protection against highlight than ISO 100 does. Why?

...because
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #84 on: July 07, 2015, 09:10:46 pm »

Then why do they cease offering as much highlight protection for lower ISO settings such like 35 and 50? Is this a kind of deception? If the user was to trust the numbers from Phase One's ISO settings and do metering accordingly, then ISO 35 has 1.5 stops less protection against highlight than ISO 100 does. Why?

Because it is designed to be shot somewhere around ISO 100.

It can be shot at 35 or 400, and in either case you lose 2 stops latitude up or down, compared with the optimal design performance at ISO 100, but you still get VERY good images.  

If I hold a fountain pen sideways, it also writes differently.

Now if you want to say that Lucifer and Beezlebub or whatever the Phase dealers present on this forum call themselves these days put a bit of lipstick on the pig, that is a different issue, but actually for creatures of the darkness I find them rather forthright, and they always seem to deliver value for kidney.

Edmund
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 09:20:03 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #85 on: July 07, 2015, 09:27:32 pm »

Because it is designed to be shot somewhere around ISO 100.

It can be shot at 35 or 400, and in either case you lose 2 stops latitude up or down, compared with the optimal design performance at ISO 100, but you still get VERY good images.  


If it is designed to be shot around ISO 100, then why does Phase One hide the fact that ISO 35 is extended ISO? Why do they offer only as low as ISO 50 (as extended ISO as well I bet) for the IQ3 80MP, instead of ISO 35 for the IQ280?
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #86 on: July 07, 2015, 10:07:21 pm »

If it is designed to be shot around ISO 100, then why does Phase One hide the fact that ISO 35 is extended ISO? Why do they offer only as low as ISO 50 (as extended ISO as well I bet) for the IQ3 80MP, instead of ISO 35 for the IQ280?

It is not. ISO35 is the real base ISO. But since most shooters using backs prefer to avoid burning highlights, the recommended ISO is ISO100 which - as Edmund correctly explained - is a planned under-exposure by 1.5 stops that is compensated in the back preview and in raw conversion and provides amazing highlight "recovery".

This is mostly where the reputation of backs having amazing DR is coming from. There are still many MFDB shooters who will swear to you that their CCD backs behave differently than DSLRs in terms of highlight "recovery".

I don't see any issue, this has been known for years and it has served most back users and Phaseone very well.

- If you are a middle of the road shooter in studio environment, then use ISO 100 and be sure you will never run into un-recoverable burned highlights,
- If you are doing landscape/architecture with a back, then shoot at ISO35 and do ETTR.

I am not sure why you seem to consider this as a major conspiracy, this isn't any close to rocket science.

Cheers,
Bernard

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #87 on: July 07, 2015, 10:08:02 pm »

If it is designed to be shot around ISO 100, then why does Phase One hide the fact that ISO 35 is extended ISO? Why do they offer only as low as ISO 50 (as extended ISO as well I bet) for the IQ3 80MP, instead of ISO 35 for the IQ280?

Actually the 35 would be the true base ISO of the CCD if you apply ETTR. Which of course most of us wouldn't do for studio work, because we need the highlight detail in the speculars.
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #88 on: July 07, 2015, 10:09:49 pm »

Bernard,

Such eloquence. You are wasted as a photographer. Become a speechwriter instead.
Or maybe Beezelbub and Lucifer should hire you for their new Tokyo office. :)

E.

It is not. ISO35 is the real base ISO. But since most shooters using backs prefer to avoid burning highlights, the recommended ISO is ISO100 which - as Edmund correctly explained - is a planned under-exposure by 1.5 stops that is compensated in the back preview and in raw conversion and provides amazing highlight "recovery".

This is mostly where the reputation of backs having amazing DR is coming from. There are still many MFDB shooters who will swear to you that their CCD backs behave differently than DSLRs in terms of highlight "recovery".

I don't see any issue, this has been known for years and it has served most back users and Phaseone very well.

- If you are a middle of the road shooter in studio environment, then use ISO 100 and be sure you will never run into un-recoverable burned highlights,
- If you are doing landscape/architecture with a back, then shoot at ISO35 and do ETTR.

I am not sure why you seem to consider this as a major conspiracy, this isn't any close to rocket science.

Cheers,
Bernard

« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 10:12:13 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #89 on: July 07, 2015, 10:17:51 pm »

It is not. ISO35 is the real base ISO. But since most shooters using backs prefer to avoid burning highlights, the recommended ISO is ISO100 which - as Edmund correctly explained - is a planned under-exposure by 1.5 stops that is compensated in the back preview and in raw conversion and provides amazing highlight "recovery".

This is mostly where the reputation of backs having amazing DR is coming from. There are still many MFDB shooters who will swear to you that their CCD backs behave differently than DSLRs in terms of highlight "recovery".

I don't see any issue, this has been known for years and it has served most back users and Phaseone very well.

- If you are a middle of the road shooter in studio environment, then use ISO 100 and be sure you will never run into un-recoverable burned highlights,
- If you are doing landscape/architecture with a back, then shoot at ISO35 and do ETTR.

I am not sure why you seem to consider this as a major conspiracy, this isn't any close to rocket science.

Cheers,
Bernard


If ISO 35 is "the real base ISO for IQ280" then why does Phase One only offer ISO 50 for the IQ3 80MP?

Did Phase One advise or specify when to use ISO 35 (e.g. landscape/architecture) and when to use ISO 100 (e.g. portrait in studio) in their manuals or at their website? Or this is common sense assumed to be well known? This doesn't make sense to me. Landscape could also benefit from extra highlight protection. Why should landscape be shot at ISO 35? According to your logic, any Canon/Nikon/Sony user who doesn't shoot landscape/architecture at the extended ISO setting of their camera is silly? e.g. D810 at ISO 64 offers more highlight protection than ISO 32 - while most people shoot landscape at ISO 64, are you saying that most landscape photographers are not using gear properly?
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 10:25:06 pm by voidshatter »
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #90 on: July 07, 2015, 10:29:29 pm »

If ISO 35 is "the real base ISO for IQ280" then why does Phase One only offer ISO 50 for the IQ3 80MP?

Did Phase One advise or specify when to use ISO 35 (e.g. landscape/architecture) and when to use ISO 100 (e.g. portrait in studio) in their manuals or at their website? Or this is common sense assumed to be well known? This doesn't make sense to me. Landscape could also benefit from extra highlight protection. Why should landscape be shot at ISO 35? According to your logic, any Canon/Nikon/Sony user who doesn't shoot landscape/architecture at the extended ISO setting of their camera is silly? e.g. D810 at ISO 64 offers more highlight protection than ISO 32 - while most people shoot landscape at ISO 64, are you saying that most landscape photographers are not using gear properly?

Maybe you should tell us - you seem to have a line to "most landscape photographers". As for me, I wouldn't recognise a landscape if it bit me in the ass.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #91 on: July 07, 2015, 10:37:17 pm »

Maybe you should tell us - you seem to have a line to "most landscape photographers". As for me, I wouldn't recognise a landscape if it bit me in the ass.

Edmund

Let me ask a very specific question:

a) Nikon explicitly specifies that the real base ISO for the Nikon D810 is ISO 64 (with ISO 32 as extended ISO).

b) Bernard and many others here believe that the real base ISO for the Phase One IQ280 is ISO 35.

Why do they think that ISO 35 is the real base ISO for the IQ280, while ISO 32 is officially not the real base ISO for the D810? What is the difference here?

If you ask for my opinion, I would say that the real base ISO for the IQ280 is ISO 100 (with ISO 35 and ISO 50 as extended ISO).
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 10:41:42 pm by voidshatter »
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #92 on: July 07, 2015, 10:49:23 pm »

Because it is designed to be shot somewhere around ISO 100.

It can be shot at 35 or 400, and in either case you lose 2 stops latitude up or down, compared with the optimal design performance at ISO 100, but you still get VERY good images.  

If I hold a fountain pen sideways, it also writes differently.

Now if you want to say that Lucifer and Beezlebub or whatever the Phase dealers present on this forum call themselves these days put a bit of lipstick on the pig, that is a different issue, but actually for creatures of the darkness I find them rather forthright, and they always seem to deliver value for kidney.

Edmund

Following this explanation which makes sense to me based on my experience, what would be the optimal design iso performance for the 60Mp backs, which start at 50?  I can see the push to 100 as I do it often, but by 200, in my images where you still have good highlight protection, I feel the images really suffer in the shadows, i.e. excessive noise.  So I still tend to bracket most series knowing that one of the shots will be the correct one.  But to me the other side of the equation is good light for the CCD, i.e correct exposure and this becomes even more critical on shifts/movements.  The difference in say 1/60 and 1/125 @ F11 on a 15mm shift can be huge in the difference in details that are captured, and not lost to noise.  This is something I see every time I use a Phase back.  The image must have the correct or near correct exposure for the critical parts of the image, where as with a CMOS capture I have the confidence I can expose for the highlights and pull up the shadows and still have details in them, with only 1 series of exposures. 

The information in the later part of this post has been very informative. 

Thanks to all.

Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #93 on: July 07, 2015, 10:54:59 pm »

Following this explanation which makes sense to me based on my experience, what would be the optimal design iso performance for the 60Mp backs, which start at 50?  I can see the push to 100 as I do it often, but by 200, in my images where you still have good highlight protection, I feel the images really suffer in the shadows, i.e. excessive noise.  So I still tend to bracket most series knowing that one of the shots will be the correct one.  But to me the other side of the equation is good light for the CCD, i.e correct exposure and this becomes even more critical on shifts/movements.  The difference in say 1/60 and 1/125 @ F11 on a 15mm shift can be huge in the difference in details that are captured, and not lost to noise.  This is something I see every time I use a Phase back.  The image must have the correct or near correct exposure for the critical parts of the image, where as with a CMOS capture I have the confidence I can expose for the highlights and pull up the shadows and still have details in them, with only 1 series of exposures.  

The information in the later part of this post has been very informative.  

Thanks to all.

Paul


Paul,

The lower you rate the back, the better, although of course you really need to get the highlights right. The reason is that with a shift lens the sin^4 law (vignetting) lowers the exposure more and more in the far edge, and even if one *can* push, one is then eating into the shadow latitude. However, leading edge is exposed brighter, until you've shifted completely past the center, eg. using a 4x5 lens on a 36x38 back to make a pano.  

The measured T stop of the lens depends on the measurement position on the sensor, and the degree of shift.

If you really shift all the way, you need to lower the assumed ISO of the back more and more, because now the lightmeter ISO has nothing to do with the back ISO due to the shift. It's not really the back ISO which is changing, in fact it is the real T-stop of the shifted lens, but it's simpler, I guess to think in terms of ISO.

I'm not the sharpest knife in the box here, as we all know, but Erik or Bart will do the sums for you. Anyway, at 5 am. I don't expect much of myself in terms of making sense :)

Edmund
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 11:07:18 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #94 on: July 07, 2015, 11:56:55 pm »

If ISO 35 is "the real base ISO for IQ280" then why does Phase One only offer ISO 50 for the IQ3 80MP?

Did Phase One advise or specify when to use ISO 35 (e.g. landscape/architecture) and when to use ISO 100 (e.g. portrait in studio) in their manuals or at their website? Or this is common sense assumed to be well known? This doesn't make sense to me. Landscape could also benefit from extra highlight protection. Why should landscape be shot at ISO 35? According to your logic, any Canon/Nikon/Sony user who doesn't shoot landscape/architecture at the extended ISO setting of their camera is silly? e.g. D810 at ISO 64 offers more highlight protection than ISO 32 - while most people shoot landscape at ISO 64, are you saying that most landscape photographers are not using gear properly?

The base ISO is the one offering the maximum dynamic range, and therefore the lowest amount of noise.

Contrasty subject such as landscape demand the highest possible amount of DR. Because of this, they should be shot at the true base ISO. But there is another reason why you want to shoot landscape at the base ISO. This second reason is you want to perform ETTR to maximize the usage of available DR, and ETTR is easier to execute at the true base ISO of the camera, 35 ISO for the IQ280 and 64 ISO for the D810, because this the ISO at which the in camera histogram provides the most useful information about highlight clipping.

I disagree with your statement that landscape also benefits from highlight protection. If DR is finite, and it typically is, you want to maximize the usage of available DR by exposing to the right. Under-exposing, which is what you do when shooting at ISO 100 on a IQ280, results in wasting valuable stops in the shadows and you don't know you are under-exposing when shooting at ISO 100 with an IQ280 because the histogram is corrected not to show this to you.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 12:02:13 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #95 on: July 08, 2015, 12:05:42 am »

The base ISO is the one offering the maximum dynamic range, and therefore the lowest amount of noise.

Contrasty subject such as landscape demand the highest possible amount of DR. Because of this, they should be shot at the true base ISO. But there is another reason why you want to shoot landscape at the base ISO. This second reason is you want to perform ETTR to maximize the usage of available DR, and ETTR is easier to execute at the true base ISO of the camera, 35 ISO for the IQ280 and 64 ISO for the D810, because this the ISO at which the in camera histogram provides the most useful information about highlight clipping.

I disagree with your statement that landscape also benefits from highlight protection. If DR is finite, and it typically is, you want to maximize the usage of available DR by exposing to the right. Under-exposing, which is what you do when shooting at ISO 100 on a IQ280, results in wasting valuable stops in the shadows and you don't know you are under-exposing when shooting at ISO 100 with an IQ280 because the histogram is corrected not to show this to you.

Cheers,
Bernard


So I guess you are still not aware of the fact that:

a) For the IQ280 ISO 35 has the same total dynamic range as ISO 100;
b) For the D810 ISO 32 has the same total dynamic range as ISO 64.

If you disagree with the above fact, then please supply raw files as evidence to disprove;

If you agree with the above, then please answer why do you think ISO 35 is true base for IQ280 while ISO 32 is not true base for D810?
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #96 on: July 08, 2015, 12:08:26 am »

The base ISO is the one offering the maximum dynamic range, and therefore the lowest amount of noise.

Contrasty subject such as landscape demand the highest possible amount of DR. Because of this, they should be shot at the true base ISO. But there is another reason why you want to shoot landscape at the base ISO. This second reason is you want to perform ETTR to maximize the usage of available DR, and ETTR is easier to execute at the true base ISO of the camera, 35 ISO for the IQ280 and 64 ISO for the D810, because this the ISO at which the in camera histogram provides the most useful information about highlight clipping.

I disagree with your statement that landscape also benefits from highlight protection. If DR is finite, and it typically is, you want to maximize the usage of available DR by exposing to the right. Under-exposing, which is what you do when shooting at ISO 100 on a IQ280, results in wasting valuable stops in the shadows and you don't know you are under-exposing when shooting at ISO 100 with an IQ280 because the histogram is corrected not to show this to you.

Cheers,
Bernard


At least, I think the histo on the Phase back is a true Raw histo. Would the one on the Nikon be one of those toycam Jpeg imaginary histograms which ensures every image with a flower in it is blown out?

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #97 on: July 08, 2015, 12:19:48 am »

At least, I think the histo on the Phase back is a true Raw histo. Would the one on the Nikon be one of those toycam Jpeg imaginary histograms which ensures every image with a flower in it is blown out?

Edmund

The IQ3 series is advertised to offer a function for real histogram based on RAW. This is not true for the IQ2 series. Neither ISO 50 nor ISO 100 gives the correct highlight warning in playback for the IQ260 (which I assume would also be the case for the IQ280). The user has to rely on his own experience.





Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #98 on: July 08, 2015, 12:46:33 am »

Hi Bernard,

I would suggest that you are right, except that we don't really know what the histograms shows and neither do we know what the camera/back does with the raw file. With a huge range of values (1- 65536) it would make a lot of sense just leave the raw file alone when increasing ISO, and that may be what the DxO-mark data indicates on the IQ-180.

Another issue the "film curve" that C1 applies as default to the raw image. This curve pushes highlights and makes the highlight region nonlinear. So, even an ETTR image may look to bright and having compressed highlights with C1. At least, that is my experience. Other converters also apply tonal compression, it is needed when mapping contrast scenery to low contrast media. But, at least with my P45+, film curve will be much brighter than linear in C1. In LR6 it seems that changing tone curve preserves brightness.

So, what I see is that the Phase One toolchain essentially protects highlights. LR on the other hand gladly applies highlight recovery, without giving any information and applies some default exposure correction.

On both the P45+ and on the Sonys I have the in camera/back histogram is better than its reputation. When I expose ETTR on the camera histogram the resulting raw histogram in RawDigger is pretty close to ETTR, while histograms in both C1 and LR6 are misrepresented (compared to RawDigger). I feel raw converters should have an option to show the unmanipulated raw histogram.

Best regards
Erik

The base ISO is the one offering the maximum dynamic range, and therefore the lowest amount of noise.

Contrasty subject such as landscape demand the highest possible amount of DR. Because of this, they should be shot at the true base ISO. But there is another reason why you want to shoot landscape at the base ISO. This second reason is you want to perform ETTR to maximize the usage of available DR, and ETTR is easier to execute at the true base ISO of the camera, 35 ISO for the IQ280 and 64 ISO for the D810, because this the ISO at which the in camera histogram provides the most useful information about highlight clipping.

I disagree with your statement that landscape also benefits from highlight protection. If DR is finite, and it typically is, you want to maximize the usage of available DR by exposing to the right. Under-exposing, which is what you do when shooting at ISO 100 on a IQ280, results in wasting valuable stops in the shadows and you don't know you are under-exposing when shooting at ISO 100 with an IQ280 because the histogram is corrected not to show this to you.

Cheers,
Bernard

Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
Re: Best ISO for IQ280
« Reply #99 on: July 08, 2015, 12:58:39 am »

Just did another test on the Nikon D4S to see how the in-camera playback works - apparently neither ISO 50 nor ISO 100 can correctly report the highlight clipping. Actually ISO 50 gave more accuracy. According to Bernard's logic, the real base native ISO is 50 for the Nikon D4S (which is against Nikon's official specification).
« Last Edit: July 09, 2015, 12:53:33 pm by Yunli Song »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10   Go Up