What are these yellow lines and how do I turn them off?
2024.05.16 23:37 hoyapolyneuraWhat are these yellow lines and how do I turn them off?
Sony A7iii. I’m not sure what I did but these lines are appearing on the screen on my camera and because I have no idea how I turned them on, I’m not sure how to turn them off.
2024.05.06 03:58 sfgbotPOSTGAME THREAD: Giants @ Phillies, 5/5. Join the Giants game / baseball discussion and social thread!
Postgame Thread 5/5/2024
Final Score: Giants 4, Phillies 5 Purpose of this thread
Discuss developing baseball action LIVE
Discuss the Giants game
Post hilarious memes / images / gifs / information that may not deserve a front-page post of its own. If it's big news, feel free to do both! This, and the gameday thread, are good places to post your Dodger jokes and memes.
Discuss ANYTHING as long as it follows the rules of conduct.
2024.04.30 11:54 OsirisAIStock Information for #ULVR - 1d
#ULVR #1d #Stock─────────── Ensemble model * Overview: The synthetic investment attractiveness indicator equals -22 (out of +/-100). The model ensemble suggests the market will tend to be bearish in the nearest future. Optimal past * Optimal past: The optimal lookback period for modelling is currently 481 candles. The market is currently bullish, appreciating by 11.53% during the latest phase. Elliot Waves * Elliot Waves: The market's trend has changed and currently goes up.
Elliot Waves Settings: Elliot Waves were updated. The current wavelength is 21.
Price Bound Modelling * HAR model at confidence level 95.0%: the HAR model forecasts volatility of 0.8517% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4129.94 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4072.07 or above 4187.81.
BRW VaR at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4127.41 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4075.13 or above 4183.58.
Historical simulation at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4127.56 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4075.75 or above 4183.45.
Multifractal range at confidence level 95.0%: in the next 256 candles, the price will fluctuate around 4042.54 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 3535.57 or above 5080.32.
Fibonacci with seven retracements: the price is likely to rebound downward from the nearest Fibonacci resistance of 4195.63 at the level of 76.4%. The nearest Fibonacci support is 4017.99 at the level of 61.8%.
Fibonacci with five retracements: the price is likely to rebound upward from the nearest Fibonacci support of 4017.99 at the level of 61.8%. The nearest Fibonacci resistance is 4483.05 at the level of 100.0%.
Fibonacci with four retracements: the price is likely to rebound upward from the nearest Fibonacci support of 4017.99 at the level of 61.8%. The nearest Fibonacci resistance is 4483.05 at the level of 100.0%.
MVaR bounds at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4122.43 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4083.57 or above 4201.96.
Forecast * MA model at confidence level 95.0%: the MA model forecasts a return of 0.0006% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4130.85 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4038.11 or above 4223.6.
AR model at confidence level 95.0%: the AR model forecasts a return of 0.0006% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 4130.85 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 4065.28 or above 4196.43.
Stability Indicators * Generalised extreme value: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Power law: According to the indicator, the stability of the market is uncertain
Student degrees of freedom: According to the indicator, the stability of the market is uncertain
Tukey lambda: According to the indicator, the stability of the market is uncertain
Seasonality test * Seasonality test: According to the generalised seasonality test, there are no seasonal effects on the market. Distribution analysis * Best-fit distribution: Best-fit distribution has changed, and now it is Laplace ─────────── Not investment advice. #ULVR #1d #trading #Distribution analysis
2024.04.29 01:55 OsirisAIStock Information for AUDCAD - 1d
#AUDCAD #1d #Forex─────────── Ensemble model * Overview: The synthetic investment attractiveness indicator equals 18 (out of +/-100). The model ensemble suggests the market will tend to be bullish in the nearest future. Optimal past * Optimal past: The optimal lookback period for modelling is currently 96 candles. The market is currently bearish, depreciating by 0.8% during the latest phase. Elliot Waves * Elliot Waves: The market's trend has changed and currently goes up.
Elliot Waves Settings: Elliot Waves were updated. The current wavelength is 34.
Price Bound Modelling * HAR model at confidence level 95.0%: the HAR model forecasts volatility of 0.4187% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
BRW VaR at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
Historical simulation at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
Multifractal range at confidence level 95.0%: in the next 256 candles, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.83 or above 0.97.
Fibonacci with seven retracements: the price is likely to rebound downward from the nearest Fibonacci resistance of 0.89 at the level of 38.2%. The nearest Fibonacci support is 0.88 at the level of 23.6%.
Fibonacci with five retracements: the price is likely to rebound downward from the nearest Fibonacci resistance of 0.89 at the level of 38.2%. The nearest Fibonacci support is 0.86 at the level of 0.0%.
Fibonacci with four retracements: the price is likely to rebound downward from the nearest Fibonacci resistance of 0.89 at the level of 38.2%. The nearest Fibonacci support is 0.86 at the level of 0.0%.
MVaR bounds at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
Forecast * MA model at confidence level 95.0%: the MA model forecasts a return of 0.066% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
AR model at confidence level 95.0%: the AR model forecasts a return of 0.066% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 0.89 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 0.89 or above 0.9.
Stability Indicators * Generalised extreme value: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Power law: According to the indicator, the stability of the market is uncertain
Student degrees of freedom: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Tukey lambda: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Seasonality test * Seasonality test: According to the generalised seasonality test, there are seasonal effects on the market with cycle periodicity 37. Distribution analysis * Best-fit distribution: Best-fit distribution has changed, and now it is Student's T ─────────── Not investment advice. #AUDCAD #1d #trading #Distribution analysis
2024.04.16 17:02 OsirisAIStock Information for #AMD - 1d
#AMD #1d #Stock─────────── Ensemble model * Overview: The synthetic investment attractiveness indicator equals 61 (out of +/-100). The model ensemble is confident the market will be strongly bullish in the nearest future. Optimal past * Optimal past: The optimal lookback period for modelling is currently 353 candles. The market is currently bullish, appreciating by 124.34% during the latest phase. Elliot Waves * Elliot Waves: The market's trend has changed and currently goes up.
Elliot Waves Settings: Elliot Waves were updated. The current wavelength is 55.
Price Bound Modelling * HAR model at confidence level 95.0%: the HAR model forecasts volatility of 2.4187% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 163.28 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 156.8 or above 169.76.
BRW VaR at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 163.01 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 154.83 or above 171.08.
Historical simulation at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 163.01 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 155.08 or above 171.1.
Multifractal range at confidence level 95.0%: in the next 256 candles, the price will fluctuate around 166.2 and with 95.0% probability will not go below -37.94 or above 417.42.
Fibonacci with seven retracements: the price is likely to rebound upward from the nearest Fibonacci support of 161.28 at the level of 61.8%. The nearest Fibonacci resistance is 186.48 at the level of 76.4%.
Fibonacci with five retracements: the price is likely to rebound upward from the nearest Fibonacci support of 161.28 at the level of 61.8%. The nearest Fibonacci resistance is 227.24 at the level of 100.0%.
Fibonacci with four retracements: the price is likely to rebound upward from the nearest Fibonacci support of 161.28 at the level of 61.8%. The nearest Fibonacci resistance is 227.24 at the level of 100.0%.
MVaR bounds at confidence level 95.0%: in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 162.98 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 155.84 or above 171.77.
Forecast * MA model at confidence level 95.0%: the MA model forecasts a return of 0.3673% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 163.47 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 151.92 or above 175.01.
AR model at confidence level 95.0%: the AR model forecasts a return of 0.3673% in the next candle, the price will fluctuate around 163.47 and with 95.0% probability will not go below 155.31 or above 171.63.
Stability Indicators * Generalised extreme value: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Power law: According to the indicator, the stability of the market is uncertain
Student degrees of freedom: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Tukey lambda: According to the indicator, the market is stable
Seasonality test * Seasonality test: According to the generalised seasonality test, there are no seasonal effects on the market. Distribution analysis * Best-fit distribution: Best-fit distribution has changed, and now it is Logistic ─────────── Not investment advice. #AMD #1d #trading #Distribution analysis
2024.04.15 22:18 Lanky_MooseletNational Guard Officer Revert to Warrant AND Branch Transfer Timeline
Good afternoon, ArmyAviationApplicant. I am a post-command National Guard Engineer Captain. After more than enough staff time, I decided that field grade is simply not for me. I do however ultimately enjoy the Army and have always wanted to be a military aviator. My vision was simply too terrible to branch aviation from my commissioning source. Looking over the posts here, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of reserve component officers from another branch reverting to aviation warrant. I was hoping that by chronicling my experience here I could help others in a similar situation know what to expect
August 2019: Pay for PRK corrective surgery after attending Sapper School and deciding that I never again want to deal with prescription eyepro inserts. If you do this, make sure you attend all your follow on appointments and put the medical records in a safe deposit box. You will need them for your flight physical.
June 2023: Leave an incredibly tedious battalion Commander's Update Brief at Annual Training just in time to see National Guard helicopters flying firefighting missions. Realize that I can spend the rest of my Army career doing this or that. Contact the Warrant Officer Strength Manager (WOSM) the next day and start putting together the packet. It may vary by state but I needed a Letter of Interest, 3 Letters of Recommendation, PT Scorecard, my SRB, a Resume, and every single OER.
July 2023: After calling around to various military clinics, I scheduled a flight physical in September at Fort Knox, KY. Although I could have waited to schedule my flight physical through my state, I would have had to wait until February of 2024 just to schedule the physical and it could have been several months after that before I could actually complete the physical. I'd heard horror stories about waiting upwards of eight months for physical approvals and decided to get the ball rolling sooner rather than later.
September 2023: I receive my last letter of recommendation from my brigade commander completing my applicant packet. A quick note to prospective applicants: your rater is already behind on your NCOEOER. Don't make them write a letter of recommendation from scratch. Depending on how precocious you want to be/how busy your recommender is (these two factors should be directly proportional) I highly recommend at least giving them a series of bullet points with your positive metrics or even writing the entire letter yourself and handing it to them for edit and signature. Shortly afterwards I drove across the country to Fort Knox and completed my flight physical with a vocal assurance from the surgeon that I should see this approved within a couple weeks.
September 2023-February 2024: Wait for the clinic to resubmit my incomplete physical three times before they get it right and I receive approval from Novosel. Once approved, I am added to the candidate roster for my home state's quarterly board in April. In the meantime, I also build and submit a packet to an adjacent state as a contingency.
April 2024: My WOSM builds a constructive credit request, which is essentially just a 4187. The constructive credit request should allow me to revert to warrant without attending WOCS. Someone I met on this forum also informs me that constructive credit requests are no longer necessary to revert to warrant, but I am waiting for my WOSM to chase down that information through official channels. My home state also switches their quarterly in-person board to a paper board last minute. Although my WOSM told me I should have results by close of business on the day of the board, it took them two days to get back to me and only to inform me that the president wanted to have a brief phone interview with me. Ten days after the board convened, I speak with the selecting official on the phone and he gives me a vocal acceptance.
May 2024: I attend the selection board in an adjacent state. It was an extremely pleasant experience. I did some research on common questions and didn't have to think very hard on my replies. They offered me a tour of the facility afterwards and I was impressed with both the facility and the culture. The president calls me the next day to inform me of my selection. He also informs me that I will be a priority to book a hard flight school seat because I am rapidly approaching waiver age.
???: I'm still waiting on the constructive credit request and deliberating which offer to accept. Both organizations offer pros and cons in terms of available airframe, commute, culture, facilities, training and operational opportunities, etc. Additionally, I'll need to consider the lost time of adding an IST to my already lengthy timeline.
I'll update as things progress here and hopefully have a complete timeline by the end of the fiscal year. Let me know if you have any more specific questions and I'll try to answer them.
2024.04.11 18:05 ExaskryzXL Candy Goals: Bug Out 2024
Index
We start with a recap of the spawns available.
Then we'll list and categorize text-based what Pokemon you may want to build.
Next are the details of all of those Pokemon and how much XL candy you'd need for them, and exactly where they rank in each league within some tables. Sorted by Pokedex (Family) order.
At the bottom is our tables on Megas
Spawns
You've probably seen various other infographics on the event. But to remind you of what's spawning in this event, we have:
Method
Pokemon
Wild
Caterpie
Wild
Weedle
Wild, Raid
Shuckle
Wild
Wurmple
Wild
Kricketot
Wild
Combee
Wild
Sewaddle
Wild
Dwebble
Wild
Cutiefly
Wild, Raid
Nincada
Research
Paras
Research
Venonat
Research
Burmy Plant
Research
Karrablast
Research
Shelmet
Research
Dewpider
Research
Wimpod
Raid
Pineco
Raid
Skorupi
Raid
Beedrill
Raid
Pinsir
Raid
Kleavor
Raid
Heracross
Raid
Tapu Bulu
Raids are excluded in the mega analyses because you know what you're going to encounter and can plan accordingly on a mega if you need it, and they are behind paywalls to really grind them. Plus raids rarely tend to align with the actual event all the way through. Eggs are also excluded because megas don't affect them.
Lists for Targets at a Glance
Pokemon are listed in each category and league as explained here. Exact XL candy counts and rankings are further in the post.
Any Pokemon family here has all members either unrated by PvPoke for non-Master leagues and doesn't warrant XL, OR for the Master Leagues, anything that is unrated or ranks in the bottom 50% is here.
Shuckle
Nincada
PVE:
Based on the infographic found here: https://reddit.com/TheSilphRoad/1bspkt9/ where Pokemon are tiered into S(±), A, B, C, D, E. Tier A contains the baseline Pokemon for a type, the tier you would want to build in if you had unlimited resources.
B or Better
Mega Beedrill as Poison and Bug
Mega Scizor as Bug
Mega Pinsir as Bug
Shadow Pinsir as Bug
Mega Heracross as Fighting and Bug
C or Worse, but can be better as a shadow
Escavalier as Bug
Tapu Bulu as Fairy and Grass
C or Worse, already has shadow released
Mega Scizor as Steel
Shadow Scizor as Steel and Bug
Shadow Drapion as Poison
Tables
Open Metas
Family XL Candy
Pokemon
XL For Standard
XL For Shadows
Method and PvP Open League Ranks 2024-03-02
Caterpie XL Candy
296
360
Wild
Caterpie
296
360
Little League: 313/437 (Rated 0.2837)
Weedle XL Candy
592
720
Wild
Weedle
296
360
Little League: 310 (254 Shadow)/437 (Rated 0.4187)
Everyone plays the game with different goals. PvP and/or PvE battling may be of different priorities to different players, so I took an approach in divvying up those priorities to figure out the top few megas for each playstyle.
Green, Yellow, and Orange PvP + Green and Yellow PvE
I'm holding a contest for DerreTech ship builds. Large Class C ships and Small Class A ships that win will be featured in the mod itself once Creation Kit is out. I have begun building the DerreTech Headquarters, and I'll need some ships to display and sell. I will make replica ship model decorations for your ships to include in the mod as well (which I can already do). The rules are pretty strict so that when I put your ships into the game, no other mod is going to be required all of a sudden. The size limit on Class C ships is there so that I can be sure to fit multiple ships in my HQ. Rules:
Cannot use flips or variants of my modules that are added by another mod or patch (recent addition to the rules). all my flips and variants are pictured above
CAN use any vanilla modules needed
CAN use mods that add flips/snaps to vanilla modules
CAN use any ship overlap tolerance
Class C Rules:
Cannot have more than 150 modules
Cannot be longer than 52 meters
Cannot be wider than 46 meters
Cannot have more than 6 vertical levels (21 meters, not counting the height from my angled wings)
MUST use my SM373 Cockpit
Class A Rules:
MUST use my BW Cockpit
Strike the balance between making it as small as possible while still having a good amount of detail (and a good amount of DerreTech modules)
Tips:
The wider variety of my DerreTech modules you use, the better. I have every type of module except for a docker and a landing bay (and a landing gear for Class A ships)
I understand I don't have habs in vanilla shapes, so vanilla habs will be needed to fill out a lot of the space.
I only have two weapons, and I don't care about the Scrambler very much. Use the Neo-Howitzer on large ships if you can- other than that, the ship weapons won't count much (if at all).
Please don't have more than two sets of each kind of angled wing. These quickly start looking ridiculous the more of them you use. One set of each is ideal if you use them.
Use my newer metallic stuff. I don't care very much about my older stuff.
The ONLY aspect about the interior of the ship that I care about for this is that you use my modules to avoid having any ladders. You can offset levels with my Y-Sym to prevent having ladders. My hab spines, ramps, stairs, corners, 1x3, and 1x2 all prevent ladders.
I'm not a big fan of excessive overlap tolerance. Use it sparingly on visible modules.
Use the Y-Sym for large Class C's.
Use the MM Series modules for Class A's.
Entry Format:
Must be a submission to this subreddit DerreTech, or at least linked here so I have them all in one place
Include as many screenshots as possible.
If it's a large Class C, please include how many modules it's made up of.
Class A entry example (the screenshots were taken before I had created my MM Series Modules) Class C entry example I don't know yet when I will close this contest, but it will probably run for quite some time. Winners are determined solely at my discretion. I reserve the right to modify winning ships at my own discretion before adding them into my mod. If it gets to a point where there's more ships that I want to include than I have space for on my HQ's showroom floor, I may end up rotating ships in and out; I imagine that I'll be able to keep as many as I want to sell from my ship services tech. I know that I can add as many replica decorations as I want to make. If something from the beta carries over into the real game update, DerreTech is dead and my modules are gone forever. I'd have to rebuild all of my modules from scratch. So I won't be able to put these ships into the game. Sorry, everyone.
Hey there, recently, I've been incurring some worries involving HQDA regarding their process for entitlements as a result of Army G1/ARCYBER G1 determinations. I am looking for answers that some Soldiers impacted have voiced from that I couldn't find an answer for. Around the start of the Fiscal Year, there were rumors and loose side-channel talks in the ranks about the concern for ARCYBER's Cyber Advanced Incentive Pay (CAIP) and their SDAP circumstances. There were discussions on an audit that was to be conducted, and I do not know the exact knowledge of what the outcome of the audit was aside that they failed. My inference is that the program was either being tracked through personnel improperly or justified improperly. As a result of the announcements between what Army G1 and ARCYBER G1 has approached. Around the start of March, ARCYBER spearheaded the announcement that Service members are no longer eligible to receive both CAIP and SDAP. Due to restrictions set forth at 3.5.4.4 DoD 7000.14R Financial Management Regulation. "Soldiers may receive more than one assignment or special duty pay listed in DoDI 1340.26; however a Soldier may not receive multiple assignment or special duty for the same purpose and period of service and the combination of pays authorized under may not exceed an average monthly amount of $3,500." As CAIP/SDAP guidance were written out of compliance with 2018 policy and law, which Army G1 was approving annually. This has caused FY24 CAIP approval delayed until ARCYBER deconflicts this process. Enforced Voluntarily suspension of one program would result in program compliance, If SM receives only one special pay, SDAP or CAIP, HQDA will not suspend either program. Army G1 is unlikely to recoup back pay if immediate action is taken by ARCYBER. Due to that determination, ARCYBER communicated and swiftly sent out a mass eForm to declare you had 12 days for whether you decide to acknowledge the new FY24 CAIP implementation guidance which echoes the restrictions similarly above. Which includes all Soldiers currently receiving SDAP and CAIP base on certified work roles, and whether you choose to revoke the enrollment of CAIP or SDAP. Enlisted Soldiers were then counseled at the unit level, and instructed to voluntarily change their own PARs end date of SDAP on IPPS-A or their pay would be recouped. In my own opinion, ARCYBER has done a decent job at being transparent, communicating, and seeking to give the best for their own. And from the outside perspective, it feels like they relied on HQDA to kind of enforce mistakes, and when it was approved, they didn't question anything. The main problem with this is the enforcement to take action from HQDA and that both CAIP and SDAP were previously initiated from prior guidance of 3 year contractual-based DA 4187s for the majority of the force with a specified end-date that was either 3 years or a PCS/ETS date. With this contract, the stipulations for CAIP were failure to fulfill the work role, failure of compliance with current or new guidance/implementations set forth by ARCYBER, work requirements were revoked, all which lead to a termination of entitlements. Those all would essentially qualify for the FMR tables that identify you would face recoupment if you broke the contract's stipulations. For SDAP however, it was just written that you fulfilled a work role IAW with the current ALARACT that published the special duties and their listings, and it would only be removed if you were failure to align or be designated for that duty position. If I am correct, IAW Title 37 USC Ch. 5 Sec 373 and DoD 7000.14 - R FMR v7a which HQDA is using to enforce ARCYBER on these legalities, outlines that essentially they are well within rights to terminate it, but are unable to recoup it since the SM are not breaking their agreements for service or duty performances and are protected since the circumstances determined are beyond the member’s control due to them having no power over how the approvals of DoDI 1340.26 are orchestrated between ARCYBER or HQDA. This isn't exactly the case, since HQDA has already declared they would recoup money if swift voluntary action over 12 days was not taken by the individual SMs. There are several approaches for recoupment that HQDA may attempt to take, but overall, most situations such as what SD or tier level a SM is, and how long their 3 years 4187 remainder time is, will determine typical amounts of over 2,000+ dollars. Some of the answers I am looking for are: How do I help Soldiers who have been taxed on this income and are getting served indebtedness letters that would have now reduced their income? Does HQDA possess legal authority to recoup costs because guidance changing, despite Soldiers adequately serving the roles for what contract they entered? Would you consider this outside of good faith or impactful to personnel management or retention? How else can I bolster any Soldier who seeks to go to legal about this? Why would we penalize SMs, when they could just correct currently certified people and ensure everything is legal? Why is HQDA having so much conflict with this, but Air Force is handing out CAIP and SDAP alike, at much higher rates?
2024.03.22 23:54 shindiginHow to click on cloudflare's human verification checkbox programatically?
I'm using selenium to access a url that has cloudflare protection. I'm neither able to find the checkbox programmatically, nor able to avoid being detected in the first place. I'm currently exploring the possibility of replacing all selenium code with requests-based approach, but there's many additional complexities associated with the conversion, therefore I need the selenium approach to work for the time being. I tried other approaches with seleniumbase and undetected-chromedriver, both trigger the human check, so neither is an option as well. After some experimentation with selenium flags, I managed to make the manual clicking work. Now I want to make the clicking happen programmatically but whenever I lookup the checkbox, it's not there. This is the html contained in the iframe which contains a #document thing: ``` Just a moment...
driver.switch_to.frame(driver.find_element(By.XPATH, '//iframe')) driver.find_elements(By.CSS_SELECTOR, 'input[type=checkbox]') [] And I also tried accessing the checkbox using JS: document.querySelector('#challenge-stage > div > label > input[type=checkbox]') null ``` Any idea how this could be achieved?
Pungcheondo has been striving for excellence since 1984, now into its second generation. We promise to provide high-quality products by combining not only the tradition we have preserved since '84 but also the latest technology.
I believe the maker is keeping his promises, with the usage of high-end blade steels with modern knife making technics, combined with the traditional style of the blade.
The Knife
Blade material: CPM MagnaCut Handle material: African Blackwood (A.K.A: Mpingo, Dalbergia melanoxylon) If you're not familiar with MagnaCut, I recommend reading an article from the developer of the steel.CPM MagnaCut - The Next Breakthrough in Knife Steel - Knife Steel Nerds In short, it is a steel with hardness matching that of Japanese steels at HRC 62~65, with longer edge retention than SG2/R2, with the toughness that surpasses knife steels used in German brands like Henckels and Wusthof.The best part is that it's almost stain-free while keeping all those edge retention and toughness. These MagnaCut knives used to be in the shape of Kiritsuke during its initial production, but then switched to traditional Gyuto after receiving some feedback. Also, I was informed that the blade geometry and handle finishing had increased drastically in the past few years. The bladesmith actively communicates and receives feedback from his customers to push the quality even more, and that worked pretty damn well. https://preview.redd.it/bpe27k6ot6mc1.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=61ca64a14d106e5985af6845bd5de7d5ea367c58 https://preview.redd.it/ffdsud8nr6mc1.jpg?width=2561&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6ccf05ee517b269904bf4c186b2fec4ed11df93d The handles are made from African Blackwood, a slow growing, near threatened species of tree. The tree takes around 70~100 years to grow into a timber size. It is also a true rosewood, often used for premium acoustic instruments. Does the knife sing? Maybe not, but I do enjoy cutting with it. The specific wood used for these handles are great looking with their beautiful colors. The handle has some good weight on them, and they are perfectly finished in a way that it almost feels like there's an epoxy coat on it. https://preview.redd.it/by8v3w0et6mc1.jpg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0e0aa730821fefd9ec7b130a7662d5e558ad7633
Geometry & Choil Shot
If there is one thing more that's more important than the type of steel used in the blade, it is the geometry.Thankfully, his knives have some of the best geometry you can find for a knife. Blade Spine Blade spine is thin, measuring around 1.8mm (0.07 inches). The edges of the spine and revealed tang are also rounded to provide better handling feel. While it's not as thin as the thinnest knives available, it's a good balance between laser-cutting feel without sacrificing the durability too much. He does make another knife with a spine thickness of only 1.2mm (0.047 inches) so it's possible to get it thinner, but it's my first premium knife that I'll be using for all sorts of cutting, and I didn't want to take risk of breaking it by an accident. Choil Shot The blade is full-flat ground, with a thin behind-the-edge profile. It might seem very brittle due to its sharp angle, but the combination of high hardness & toughness of MagnaCut helps a lot with keeping the durability. If the wedge looks thick, remember that the spine is less than 2mm thick. Overall, the knife is very well-made, with good material and great geometry. I can't tell the specific price as I provided the material and ordered three knives in total, but the price he quoted me was very reasonable, safe to say it's 'cheap' when compared to custom knife makers in the US with a similar build quality.