As some members already know, I have been working on a series of DIY screen formulations in efforts to produce a better screen. Attached is a rather familiar image with a trio of panels projected onto. I request that members please post their preference, either left, top right, or bottom right. My eyes, after all, are only mine. Thank you.

HR1:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3423272#post3423272

HR2:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3437324#post3437324

HR3:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3440453#post3440453

HR4:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3441160#post3441160

HR5:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3449534#post3449534

Begin:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2949689#post2949689

SD supply list:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2954906#post2954906

Family Portrait:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2959089#post2959089

Near perfect:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2959100#post2959100

4 Board Challenge:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2960671#post2960671

NEC 240k SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3413964#post3413964

Very 1st CMRA SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2706007#post2706007

More Misty 3D:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2735331#post2735331

CMRA ME intro:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2636326#post2636326

ME Paint Can:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2716869#post2716869

ME HD Code label:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2719264#post2719264

ME Z1-NK fleshtone SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2728112#post2728112

Original ME screen:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2884403#post2884403

CMRA silver intro:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2987893#post2987893

Silver 1st SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2999142#post2999142

Silver Formulation:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3051872#post3051872

ME swatch:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3059073#post3059073

CMRA camera settings:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3187156#post3187156

Leeloo FLASH comparison:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3272910#post3272910

Silver SS start here:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2999142#post2999142

Z2 arrives:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3392173#post3392173

Gladiator FLASH comparison:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3287454#post3287454

Gladiator-2 FLASH comparison:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3287472#post3287472

the SDMM leeloo LCD standard SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3141165#post3141165

Marcom Phone comparison:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3188024#post3188024

Leeloo FLASH trio:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3263665#post3263665

SAP's Forgery:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2951573#post2951573

MissMan in action:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3058691#post3058691

Darla-Silver vs SDMM:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3211389#post3211389

NK 4x3 close-up comparo with SDE:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3210652#post3210652

Z1 SDE blowup:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3328347#post3328347

Biggles incredible SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3507725#post3507725

Tryg on LCD-LCOS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3538040#post3538040

Biggles HDNet SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=266326

Tobz67 hi-gain LFS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=3566834&fullpage=1

How to post SS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3568355#post3568355

Multipass LFS comparison:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3588204#post3588204

Text haloing example:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3345762#post3345762

Clarence CRT-LFS test:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3340422#post3340422

MSRP via Audioholics:http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/ProjectorScreenReview_01.html

HT-DIY RPTV setup:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3645510#post3645510

HT-DIY RP links:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3638038#post3638038

Clarence RP info:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3638038#post3638038

Z2 Thumbnails from HR1:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3675899#post3675899

My ME+ experience-Begin:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2936861#post2936861

Introduction of Plexiglas to AVS:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2952708#post2952708

Halos explained-CMRA:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2959587#post2959587

East meets West. MM posts from my PC:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3054269#post3054269

kamel407 intros new thread:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3063941#post3063941

First ever SDMM Full Screen Shot:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3106616#post3106616

CMRA light fusion Claims:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3500126#post3500126

CMRA compares Dlux with SDlux:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2952360#post2952360

CMRA introduces ME discovery:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2636326#post2636326

Canuck2 Thread-Start:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3000253#post3000253

CMRA mirror curiosity:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3091103#post3091103

CMRA To mirror or not with screenshot:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3095774#post3095774

CMRA intros scattered light fusion:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3708169#post3708169

CMRA intros silver vs ME:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2999142#post2999142

CMRA's silver formulation:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3051872#post3051872

LCD vs CRT:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3572559#post3572559

Begin SD/MM under construction: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3314383#post3314383

First Member Post from Canuck Shootout2: http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3682337#post3682337

Light Fusion show comments #59: http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=4524111#post4524111

Light Fusion show comments #60: http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=4524114#post4524114

CMRA perfects S-I-L-V-E-R: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7626202&&#post7626202

CMRA's NEW S-I-L-V-E-R application: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7626202&&#post7626202

D50 on S-I-L-V-E-R: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7663827&&#post7663827

D50-Leeloo on S-I-L-V-E-R: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7495355&&#post7495355

Oly on S-I-L-V-E-R: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7690789&&#post7690789

Art's Setup: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12080013#post12080013

Art's setup direct: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=12080013&postcount=17

S-I-L-V-E-R starts here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=859818

I'm a sucker for brighter when it comes to skin tones and the red on the bottom right seems a bit too red. Need more colors and blacks spread across the screen to get a better feel.

I'm surprised how "blood shot" her eyes are in the close ups of this movie, too many 5-6 AM wake ups and long days. Her X was on Oprah today.

She's cute though.

Allan

Top Right is my preference.

Yes, need some representation of black levels too. But I liked the upper right.

151 views and three votes. I have more faith in you than that. Vote like my pocketbook depends on it. It does.

Just a suggestion...it might be easier to compare if you had 3 screen shots of the same image, vs one composite.

Top Right...bright but not saturated.

Top right for me too.

Damn! That's a shot, ain't it?!

I agree with Mit07 - a few shots to compare would help. Of course I realize you don't have full screens for all of these formulations, but even taking the same shot calibrated for each section (if possible) would show how different they really are.

But so far it looks like the two right images are the better of the bunch. Show me some calibrated images.

I am definitely no expert, but top right was the first one to catch my eye.

top right

I guess that I am all alone on the Left side?

I like the red in her hair on the left. More detail, more natural. Look at her eyes. The left side eye looks much better.

Her eye on the right side looks too red and her hair is borderline cartoon in color.

Top right is my choice. IMHO, NK is the most beautiful actress in history of cimema.

I like the left too...

There seems to be less blue in the left. (sorry to bring up the "blue" thing again).

Depending upon the black levels, I would say either the top right or bottom right.

Top and bottom right look best to me

Nicole Kidman is my preference.

You should have used the poll feature to better-track what people are liking. I also like someone's suggestion of having three images as one segment in your current picture may not get fairly represented against its competition.

CAMRA,

I agree with WanMan above, need three full screen shots. Same exposure same camera position, same frame(not auto exposure). That's why I didn't vote. And you picked a very red image that could sway the results, since a good screen should do all colors well.

Allan

PS...I know you don't have three full screens of materials.

PSS...Sorry,...no three screens...no vote.....you are the weakest link.

PPSS...Just kidding you natural born shooter.

I vote top right also. The left side seems a little muted and soft. The top right has the color punch that that movie is known for.

Can't say if the TOP right and bottom RIGHT is a huge difference to my eyes on my monitor. But the Left and Right definitely make for a change between them, the right seems to make the skin look more smooth and less detail in a way but that could just be the angle of the light hitting her face, where as the left side seems to have more shadow detail because of the shadows. Well its hard to say for me I feel a little bit like the other ppl that posted saying need to see 3 shots with all full images. But if I had to make my decision based off that picture I would say top right for brightness and clarity

I vote for left side. The color looks more natural, IMHO.

Just a few more votes and I'll tell which is which. The polls are OPEN.

I vote left. The other two have a 'jaundiced' tinge to them, although they are very bright and clear.

RG

Top right for me too. SO..... what is this mystery screen?!?!?!?!?!? :)

I'm voting top right as well, although I can't really tell much of a difference between top right and bottom right. If only she had another eye ball on her left cheek :)

To me the top right and bottom right are equal, i would pick the one easiest to replicate.

Originally posted by siphon
Top right for me too. SO..... what is this mystery screen?!?!?!?!?!? :)

Not just yet Siphon. I prefer a few more votes. I'll settle for five.

left, left, left, right top, and right bottom...

Now can we now?:D

Its amazing I made my choice then scrolled down and read the others..

Top Right for me too.

Jerry

Top right too. I guess there's some hints of SM.

I vote top right.

Lefty :~}

It's hard to tell with this image because it seems the lighting is skewed to the left side so the that the right would naturally be darker. I like the left because her skin doesn't have that dark moire over it but the bridge of her nose looks "hot". I wish there were a few different shots to choose from to judge other colors. Given, however, what we have, I'll go for the left.

The bottom right isn't different enough from the top right to decide between the right-hand side two.

top right

My wife says top right
I say top right also!

To add another vote, my wife (who is really not interested these things) picked the top right. After I told her which one I picked (left) she said that was her 2nd choice.

RG

top left

Top Right

Ok I voted already, but I noticed many of you are having your wifes vote also, so here it goes.....

Left

that's the first time in a long time that we agree on something :~}p

TOP RIGHT Is that "Super Deluxe"?

Bottom right

Hellooooooo, CMRA, do you copy ? A lot more than five now and the wives are coming strong !
What's the damned top right stuff anyway ?

Originally posted by Cricricri
Hellooooooo, CMRA, do you copy ? A lot more than five now and the wives are coming strong !
What's the damned top right stuff anyway ?

Fair enough, Cricricri. On the left is the original Deluxe. The two right panels are "Super Deluxe", the top 3/32", the bottom 1/8" density. Design details and supply list is available on page 15 of scoob5555's 'Misty Evening + Silver' thread. Look for the next to last post.

I altered the preferences so I only get 7 pages: can you just give the post# ? Thanks anyway for the input !

Originally posted by Cricricri
I altered the preferences so I only get 7 pages: can you just give the post# ? Thanks anyway for the input !

The post # is 299. The formulation discussion actually begins with post #237 "words,words,words"

Originally posted by superprohero
TOP RIGHT Is that "Super Deluxe"?

Indeed it is. Good guess but no prize this time.

Top right then bottom right. Top right has better color and detail.

I think as other you have to have 3 complete pics to compare

CMRA...

I am just looking at the lips... those lips are no good.. way way too orange.. Maybe its the partially the projector setup.. what are you using and what are the settings.... just read the first pic..then jumped .. don't know what the aforementioned Misty Evening is.. but there is definitely a serious problem.. Skin tones are also very off... doesnt look like skin... skin looks like wax... Looked back again... Take a pic using a commercial screen... then this Misty Evening... Maybe what I am seeing is the Projector or just the transfer from your digital camera.. but to me something is definitely off..

Originally posted by mandarax
CMRA...

.. but to me something is definitely off..

Mandarax, have you been tipping a few too many Molsens' as of late? Assuming you are correct, would you be so kind as to submit your screen shot and educate the rest of us what this image should look like? TIA

Heh .. I was just trying to help out... With a remark like that why would I bother wasting my time... You are obviously quite content with the results so thats all that matters.... But thats my vote.. .. Trust me on this,, even if I had a head on collision with a case of Molsens... my brain would still know what the chroma of those lips should be... and what the chroma of the skin is suppose to look like.. but again you are happy ... so I am happy for you..
But to answer your question.. no I was not tipping a few too many Molsens.

If you don't want people to give honest objective answers you should not ask for them... not try and degrade them when they do give you an honest answer stating what they believe is off. Look... I was thinking it was the camera possibly.. It obviously isnt.. lets just agree to disagree on this one... not looking to engage in a verbiage war..

Im outa here ...

Originally posted by mandarax

.. lets just agree to disagree on this one...
Im outa here ...

Fair enough. I'll drink to that. On the other hand, perhaps for the benefit ALL members of this forum you could 'show us the way'. I'm not above correction, as was illustrated in an earlier post, when a member submitted a counter screen shot and set me straight. For EVERYONE'S benefit, I request the same from you. Please share your knowledge.

Originally posted by AlienArchbishop
I think as other you have to have 3 complete pics to compare

Your request is under consideration at this time. The more I think about it, the more I like it. It could go along way in standardizing how we post and compare screen shots in the future. (I hope I'm not all alone on this) Perhaps the moderators could provide a way to post multiple screenshots on a single post.

I just wanted to thank all who voted and contributed to this thread. Thanks again. Until next time. CMRA

Care to see the fruits of your labor? Goto Scoob's "Misty Evening + Silver" thread. Starting with Page 22, post #424, you'll see a series of screenshots. Feedback welcome.

Top right. I own Dalite HiPower and like a bright image. johnathan

top right - by a hair.

the newest comparison screen shots are now posted on scoob5555's thread starting with post #472. A surprise awaits you.

First FULL SCREEN SuperDeluxe pix. Page 9, post #173, "superplex" thread.

Originally posted by CMRA
First FULL SCREEN SuperDeluxe pix. Page 9, post #173, "superplex" thread.

Here's a couple of the real McCoys on an 84" screen. Fleshtones this time. Care to comment?

a new face

Pardon me while I use my own thread to post some requested screen shots. Yeah, you can look at 'em and even swipe 'em but I ain't about to tell you their history.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

WHAT!!!!!!!?????????


No Bangaloids!

No Bruce!

No Zorg!

Sheesh!




<< just KA. Great stuff. Very useful you know. Rest easy now, O Bearded One. >>

I would love to see a direct comparison between your shots and DVD ripped pictures on a PC. Especially the one of the 5th element's hand before reconstruction

Originally posted by Kamel407
I would love to see a direct comparison between your shots and DVD ripped pictures on a PC. Especially the one of the 5th element's hand before reconstruction

My shots are posted. You got a PC. Start rippin' and postin'.
In return I'll do the 'hand' screen shot for you.

unfortunately I have an old Pentium II 366Mhz laptop that only has a CDROM drive, I do not have DVD capability or else I would have for every screen shot already

Originally posted by Kamel407
unfortunately I have an old Pentium II 366Mhz laptop that only has a CDROM drive, I do not have DVD capability or else I would have for every screen shot already

That sounds unfortunate indeed. I surely don't know your financial well being, but EVERYBODY has friends and who amongst them doesn't own at least one PC? Surely you have a few unrepaid favors due you, right?
Or, in fine gentlemenly style, bribe your amigos with a few beers.
Good ideas are one thing. Good ideas followed up with ACTION, that's SOMETHING!

Pardon me again. I'm using my thread again to forward this request.

Paul, here is your special request. Here is approx a 640x480 crop of the original complete with SDE. (No resizing) Thanks for the many kind words and good will you share. PM me if you need another. CMRA

Paul, sorry you had problems finding the post. Here's the original (resized).
PM me if needed.

The glowing halos around the fish are very much a part of Disney's Nemo. In selected scenes it's really apparent. The screen has nothing to do with it. In this screen shot, Disney took it to the limit.

MissMan,
Here's your comparison. Pix #1 is a repost of yours. Pix #2(following thread) is mine on the 'Light Fusion'. For anybody else viewing please note these images were projected and captured with entirely different setups. EVERYTHING is different, ie, screen, projector. digicam, etc.

Pix #2

Originally posted by CMRA
The glowing halos around the fish are very much a part of Disney's Nemo. In selected scenes it's really apparent. The screen has nothing to do with it. In this screen shot, Disney took it to the limit.

Some day I'll get to see Nemo. My daughter saw it with a friend at the theater -- so I "escaped" it the first time. But, the rental will surely make it home within a few more weeks.

I did wonder how (of all the pictures you posted), that I only saw one possessing a glow (halo). I bet this adds a nice effect to the movie. Thanks for clarifying why the glow is present in that frame.

The next 2 pictures show a remarkable difference as well. For whatever reason, your version has a blue push, but is definitely more exciting. I don't know if calibration aficionados will agree, but I side with a recent post (different thread) indicating that calibration makes some things appear dull.

This means I often like things bold and exciting. A good example would be posts regarding the calibration of the new HS20. I've read that brightness on that machine drops around 350-400 lumens when properly calibrated. But, it can go twice that bright when the contrast and brightness are adjusted -- and the IRIS is turned off! And, since I prefer it this way, I must not like true calibration. Furthermore, I suspect I'm not alone.

Agreed, some movies (like SWATC, DUNE, etc) beg for muted undertones. Others, (animated movies, CABARET, etc) BEG for the bold imagery that your screen provides. Assuming that you can get both (if desired), I don't see how anyone wouldn't be thrilled with your results!

After all, deeper, richer colors, additional depth, and contrast are the main reason everyone goes "ga ga" over the higher end DLPs. Seems like you've paved the way for people to have that sooner --and at a more reasonable price! WAY TO GO!

gp

Originally posted by GreggPenn

This means I often like things bold and exciting. A good example would be posts regarding the calibration of the new HS20. I've read that brightness on that machine drops around 350-400 lumens when properly calibrated. But, it can go twice that bright when the contrast and brightness are adjusted -- and the IRIS is turned off! And, since I prefer it this way, I must not like true calibration. Furthermore, I suspect I'm not alone.

gp

Amen to that! Those adjustments are there for a reason. And, they are on every display device I have ever seen too.
BTW, what is true calibration? Factory settings? Bah!
No, the best judge, is your EYEBALLS.

The following image is what my eyeballs like. Do you think for even a moment that the PJ default settings look like this?
Yes, Gregg, you are NOT alone.

Which image satisfies? That is the question.

This is not a test. We are not comparing screens. Nor projectors. Nor cameras.
Your vote is a choice between screen shot A and screen shot be B.
Your vote has nothing to do with anything but preference. That is, which image appeals to you most.
There is NO right or wrong. ONLY which image appeals to you most.

(No photo info is posted to protect all interests and assure unbiased selection)

VOTE (A) if you prefer this image.

Vote (B) if you prefer this image

Can this image join the ballot?

It be frum a 119" SM/MM Painted wall and cutuscee ofa ZeeTwo

Hop on board the Mighty Mississippi Dragonball Express.

here's a beautiful shot

Awwwwwwww......Rats.

I could just eat a Bug and die.

That's "Woman of Mass Destruction"

Don't sweat it CMRA. These are just a taste of what is to come once my test panels and a monster SD/MM Light Fusion Screen come together.

Meanwhile,............back at Nicky's place........*

...so I'm giving you all the bird.

Getting so you can't take a walk without stumbling into all sorts of riff raff.

Where will it all lead? Don't Ass'k me.

Take a walk on the wild side.

..or are you Shrek'in for more?

Bam. There went all the old school ideas up in smoke.

OK, everybody. That's it for now. Gotta go sleep sometime.

meanwhile........, Monkey See,
Monkey do. OK?

Looks like MM wants to pony up to the big boys. Fair enough.

Take the Vote. Two screen shots. #1 and #2

First, ignore the aspect ratio. One is totally off. Just deal with it.

One image is on a 'Light Fusion' screen the other is not.

Vote ONLY on which image you like best. There is no Right and Wrong. The only reason for this is establish other members viewing preferences.

Vote (1) if you prefer this image:

Vote (2) if you prefer this image.

Also, while you are at it, go up to posts #86 and #87 and vote either "A" or "B". Thanks.

CMRA,

No.1 seems to be my favorite. I like the blonde hair coming through in the first image. It seems almost non-existent in the second.

Wayne.

Per request:

A=61124 unique colors
B=63531

Not really enough of a difference to write home about.

Those are interesting figures, eh CMRA?

But SDB..., tell us all which you prefer?


....and where are all the other votes?

I'm going to have to go with "B" here.

The AR of MM's entry is really screwing with my preference though so I'm not so sure it's a fair fight. Punching a drunk guy while he is down may be fun, but not fair.

On the other hand, "All's fair in love for screens" so what do I know?

I choose number 2. (leeloh_b) The clarity of this image is definitely superior to the other images. However, the blue is slightly overcooked. For example, her eyes look great, but her nose and cheeks look bruised (vs. dirty as intented).

You can clearly see more focus and depth in this image which make it more appealing. And, if you lower the blue gamma behind this image, there would be no contest.

(Sorry, if I analyzed more than was requested).
gp

GregPenn,

Go ahead and analyze. You voted, so you can say why.

CMRA & I am doing this to point out personal preferences. Light Fusion does deliver a punch that puts it far above most contenders, and even a few more "pretenders'. But for some, 'over the top' brilliance, even when accompanied by excellent contrast and exquisite detail, is just too much icing on the proverbial cake.

But not all, and CMRA is betting it will be a distinct minority. But there is no competition here, only a study to enhance the understanding of preferences, and therein, effect any changes in the Top Coat to further accentuate the strong points, and attenuate the few weak points.

What I feel are unique aspects of how Light Fusion combines the different wavelengths of light that react differently to the two surfaces, as well as the "illumenatory" (I made that up...) aspect of the 1/8" clear void between the surfaces both contribute to enhancing detail. So obviously, SD/MM Light Fusion should always surpass SM/MM painted on a wall. My shots also have an additional 100 Lumen and 1500:1 contrast advantage, making the SM/MM application look better than it would if matched directly against SD/MM LF using the same PJ source.

But the difference only works to illustrate how alike, and how different the two similar applications are. SM/MM LF uses a multi layer, reflective / recombination technique it shares with Big Brother SD/MM LF. But it's reflective surface (SM) is on the order of 10 times less efficient than SD/MM LF's mirror.

My preference? I want the colors to glow, and the detail to be as good as inhumanly possible..., but I don't want to see ANY fringe discoloration of the transitional areas between vibrant skin tones and adjoining shadows. A smooth transition, with no glowey boarder where reds stay prevalent and greens and blues fade away.

This phenomena is only apparent in worst case scenarios, and mostly is ONLY visible when "Freeze" is employed. But everything I have done, and continue to do is based on allowing for things most ignore, so many in fact that the sum of all beers, er fears is that a terrific application like SD/MM LF could lose it's respect due to one aspect that is elaborated on at the expense of all it's attributes.

That, my friends, it the way of human nature. And AVS is full of Humans, ( ...despite rumors to the contrary...) that love to dwell on the negative aspects, never elaborate on the positive.

Can I be much different? Apparently not, for as good a SD/MM LF is, I want it to be better. Is this a fools errand? You can help decide by posting your vote. (...if you made it through this post and are still here, that is......)

So once again, and to all; Vote, and tell us what you think. But this time, I'll select a shot for CMRA to match, one that he can easily scrounge up from his vast library.

Just to keep it real.

Originally posted by MississippiMan

But this time, I'll select a shot for CMRA to match, one that he can easily scrounge up from his vast library.

Just to keep it real.

You clever guy. You would pick one you know suffers from camera artifacts. (Please overlook the vertical banding noise from my digicam.)

Anyway, "Nicky and Guy", light fusion style:

http://members.aol.com/marcorsyscom/cmra-vote.gif

My vote is B.

I wish "A" was the exact same frame. The detail in her dreadlock gets lost with paused motion blur.

I had to dumb these down to 256 colors for the animated GIF, but I think they still look good enough to compare.

However, I like the smooth tones in A in the space between her mouth and nose. B starts to clip that to white.

Can you coax some more detail out of the wall shadow on the left?

A little more yellow in A. Were the color overlay settings the same?

Does anyone know a sw dvd player with "by exact frame" referencing/indexing instead of h:mm:ss?

-Clarence

MM-

Here's the response to your "chopped liver" question in the other thread...

http://members.aol.com/marcorsyscom/cmra-mm.gif

I know CMRA won't take offense to this, but I love the rich colors in your shot. I'm usually a sucker for CMRA's bright punch, but I'd give you the vote on this round. (CMRA, if you want, I'll start my rant about how this could be attributed to differing exposures and techniques, etc). MM, your SS skills are improving significantly!

-Clarence

P.S. Compare the bright spot in Nicky's hand.

Clarence,
Whatever you are doing is just too cool! That deserves a promotion!
From now on you get the exact same pay MM and I get. 256 colors, GIF or not, it sure is awesome.
Thanks, not just from me, but on behalf of every member/lurker that ever looks at screen shots.

No, I have the same agent as Nick Saben. I insist on 2x what you and MM make from this forum.

I keep waiting for someone to complain about the download time or the "annoying banner ad" blinking effect, but I'm on dial-up at home and I think it's worth it.

P.S. watch out for the blues on the back of his vest.

I like the left.

...as per your request, I give you the 'professor'.

...for good measure, the 'Prez'. Sorry for taking so long.

Originally posted by CMRA
...as per your request, I give you the 'professor'.


Touche.............!

Two things, I don't have that shot at present, and this is taken at low resolution last week before I started using your EP method.

Excuses, excuses. I go do it again today.


Below. Rudy Rod

De "man?" himself


In not so glorius "low Res"

I have been waiting on you, don't you know? As per our conversation earlier today, I'm forgetting my manners, and posting first.

Fresh off the digicam, folks. MissMan to follow with his SMMM version.

Ever notice he's blue in every other scene, but green here. Go figure.

****<<<<Hold the phone. The green looked really cool, but is that in there? Did I pause this on a freak frame? Pardon me while I fire up the PJ. I never saw this before. I'll be back! >>>>****

Originally posted by CMRA
I have been waiting on you, don't you know? As per our conversation earlier today, I'm forgetting my manners, and posting first.

Fresh off the digicam, folks. MissMan to follow with his SMMM version.

Ever notice he's blue in every other scene, but green here. Go figure.

Oh...I don't know about all that..................*

I'm seeing many things differently now that the Z2 us mated with this screen.

Fer instance. Not the spots under the Eyeball's tummy. I haven't noticed them before this.



BTW CMRA I think the Z1's tweaked to far away from the Blue spectrum, that's why your going green. JAG though

...same scene, same eyeball, different frame. I believe I could live with either, how about you?
PS: Did you double Clarence's take so he'll do his animation magic again?

Well, I went and fired up the PJ. Went looking for a freak "green" frame. NADA!!
I've posted many a screenshot, but I'm at loss here. This Monster aka James P Sullivan or Sully by his friends is blue and purple. Witness, and please forgive my unexplained error.

This shot looks normal to me. Et tu? Have to wonder now if my settings are off?

If this is normal, why is my blue monster green. Somebody want to compare this SS with what they see on the screen?

And, a blast from the past.

Who can be the first to identify all three? Where are they now? Apologies up front for the transfer quality. You'd understand if you owned the DVD.

2 of 3

3 of 3

Van Cleef
Segio "something"
Eastwood


Good, Bad, & The Ugly

On your knees, cretin. The BIG MAN is wantin' your attention!


Taken from 22 feet from the screen

Don't put God to the test.

He'll give you the finger.

Maybe two.

First time shown in any theater.

Luminoisty 340. A true Epic.

Anybody who says, "How Bright can a room be with SM/MM LF?" should consider this shot an absolute worst case.

Same shot, same location, 100 watts less ambient light up front.

two straight on Screen shots.

Ambient light is on the Left (Duh)
dark room on the right (Double Duh)

That would be Lee Van Cleef (Angel Eyes), Eli Wallach (Tico), and Clint from Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. You can decide which is which.

Originally posted by MississippiMan
Van Cleef
Segio "something"
Eastwood


Good, Bad, & The Ugly

Close, but wrong. Next.

Originally posted by scoob5555
That would be Lee Van Cleef (Angel Eyes), Eli Wallach (Tico), and Clint from Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. You can decide which is which.

It's Tuco (like Too-Coe). Guy's, we are showing our age, are we not? Ready for another magic movie moment quiz?

Which screen solution minimizes SDE the most? Another same scene but different frame comparison.
I feel they are about equal, but the eagle eyes may tell another story.

It's A vs B test. This time SDE. Same PJ, same source, same camera, different screen.

Here's A:

2 of 2

OK, here's B:

Let's see what viewers prefer. Two same scene images A and B. Could I get some feed back on which looks the most natural?

1 of 2, here's A

Here's B (Feedback please.)

B has slightly deeper blacks, there are more 'greenish' overtones about the edges of the armour, and overall, more shadow detail

A is a brighter image, but is reflecting a bit more "bluish tint than B. But Both present far less "blue" in the armor while maintaining an overall brillance than any I've seen so far .

Given a choice between the two, I'd choose B

Both are among the best examples of that shot that have been posted. But that is a personal observation, not a deffinative statement.

Definitely B for it's blacks and decidedly-not red-pushed picture. A has seriously pumped red that you can see in both his neck and in the unfocused crowd.

...and this is now.
Welcome to a 'bigger and better' screen shot gallery. In the past, complaints were issued because screen shots were too small and obscured important detail such as vertical banding, scan lines, grain, SDE, and the like.
Put those days behind you. Now see screen shots as they should be. No resizing, editing, or modifications.
These are the first in a series:http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3423272#post3423272

only the classics will do? How about Gladiator?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3440453#post3440453

This may help. I'd love to get my hands on a good DLP and compare first hand. If any member reading this in the San Diego area has a DLP an would like to see it on 'light fusion', you know who to PM.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3272910#post3272910

how a projected image compares with a direct view CRT image?

Here's an image from "Chicago". Two screen shots, one from an LCD projector projecting onto a screen; the other from a HD CRT 36" monitor.
Same camera, same settings.

1st image:

Now, the 2nd image. Any preferences?

CRT definitely still has the edge. Check out her hair. Can make out comb-lines and individual hairs, whereas the LCD blends the hairs together. Properly calibrated the CRT should always will - against today's digital technologies. Tomorrow's? That's the question.

Thanks for my one and only vote/feedback. It's unanimous folks! Personally, I like to think an entry level PJ holding its own against a HD CRT monitor. Not bad. Hurry up tomorrow.

Originally posted by CMRA
how a projected image compares with a direct view CRT image?

Here's an image from "Chicago". Two screen shots, one from an LCD projector projecting onto a screen; the other from a HD CRT 36" monitor.
Same camera, same settings.
Special request by CMRA:

http://herndonrelay.org/avs/cmra36.gif

Originally posted by marcorsyscom
Special request by CMRA:

http://herndonrelay.org/avs/cmra36.gif
Well there is that darn issue with a green tint again.

Not many comments but I surely agree with mikecazzx's comment. In watching you hardly ever notice such things because of the action cutting back and forth, but there's no denying it on 'freeze frame'. On the other hand, that's an entry level LCD PJ against a high end HD CRT monitor.

Something to note: So many members here express the fallacy of screen shots, but these two members clearly were able to differentiate two undeniable shortcomings of this LCD solution. Yes, I believe screen shots bring much more to the table than eye candy.

In watching you hardly ever notice such things because of the action cutting back and forth, but there's no denying it on 'freeze frame'...
clearly were able to differentiate two undeniable shortcomings
That's a good point.

Side by side it's easy to see the flaws. But even in the LCD I used in my betcha never seen a CRT vs LCD comparison like this! (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3260304#post3260304) test, I didn't notice that Leeloo was green until I superimposed it with the other picture.

On a similar flaw, I didn't notice how bad my horizontal sizing was off on my latest projector until I did this side by side post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3596498#post3596498).

-Clarence

Who's up for some LOTR-TTT screen shots on a LFS? Yeah, I broke down and got a copy. Most excellent transfer, BTW.

Originally posted by CMRA
Who's up for some LOTR-TTT screen shots on a LFS? Yeah, I broke down and got a copy. Most excellent transfer, BTW.

What the heck...No Frodo now? WOuld you believe ROTK is coming soon? I have it preordered.

Frodo and company shootout in order?

Clarence, care to lead the charge?

Originally posted by CMRA
Frodo and company shootout in order?

Clarence, care to lead the charge?

Clarence, leave that blending madness alone! ( Just kidding) I'm actually following your every post.
Love to see Frodo in 1080p 'blended' glory. Not to mention those WM9 clips...

Originally posted by CMRA
Who's up for some LOTR-TTT screen shots on a LFS? Yeah, I broke down and got a copy. Most excellent transfer, BTW.

Looks like LOTR-ROTK has been out for a week now. Anyone care to sport a few salvos? How about MM and his FSLS? Or ...

Got the ROTK Pics on LF by tomorrow evening. Fire away for direct comparisons, or play catch up.

Originally posted by MississippiMan
Got the ROTK Pics on LF by tomorrow evening. Fire away for direct comparisons, or play catch up.

I'm gunna hold your feet to the fire on this one, MM. You are a week late. Yes, we'll play 'catch-up'...but no sooner than there's something to catch-up to! And don't do like that CMRA guy does and leave out the hh:mm:ss.

Originally posted by CMRA
I'm gunna hold your feet to the fire on this one, MM. You are a week late. Yes, we'll play 'catch-up'...but no sooner than there's something to catch-up to! And don't do like that CMRA guy does and leave out the hh:mm:ss.

REPEAT request. Please post, pronto. Thank you.

No more comparisons, no more blending techniques, no more issues to vote on? How about stacked PJs? What, summer comes and everyone forgets about home theater?

The summer is ended.. Back in business (back in HT);)

One of my screen shots (HP 2.1MP camera). Goo screen and E'home8500, Theatertek, Radeon9000 (PJ color corrected at 6500k).
1280x720@72Hz
http://rennfast.dns2go.com/Public/htphoto/screenshoots/Color_Corrected/cc5.jpg
Superbit DVD.

Nothing like a little CRT magic to keep us focused. Nice pix Rolf. With fall in full swing I wonder what's next to vote on? Anybody got a bead on Sony's new 'black' screen?

Originally posted by RolfHult
The summer is ended.. Back in business (back in HT);)

One of my screen shots (HP 2.1MP camera). Goo screen and E'home8500, Theatertek, Radeon9000 (PJ color corrected at 6500k).
1280x720@72Hz
http://rennfast.dns2go.com/Public/htphoto/screenshoots/Color_Corrected/cc5.jpg
Superbit DVD.

Rolf, seems to me a RolfHult gallery is in order. Love those CRT screenies!

My "gallery" here. (http://rennfast.dns2go.com/Public/htphoto/screenshoots/) :)

What better thread to list my 3000th post?!!!

Thanks fellow AVS members for making Home Theater all that it is to me. Fun, affordable, educational, entertaining, and downright 'everyman' doable.
From DIY screens to bargain basement CRT projectors to great source material and setups; images that far exceed what I only imagined possible a year and a half ago.

Thanks, CMRA

What "only a year ago..."?

Rolf's screenie is over 1 year old itself.

It is pretty incredible though, and shows just how far DLPs and LCDs still have to go. I feel the gap is more narrower than ever, but it's still a pretty wide gulf.

What "only a year ago..."?

Rolf's screenie is over 1 year old itself.

It is pretty incredible though, and shows just how far DLPs and LCDs still have to go. I feel the gap is more narrower than ever, but it's still a pretty wide gulf.

MM, I was going to post a reply back in May. Oh well. Heads up. It's closer than you think.
FWIW, I was at the theater last night and saw the film version of 'Return of the Sith'. I'll take CRT first, digital second, and cinema third.

He's here in San Diego...but, only members reading this thread will know.

actually... i knew before i read this thread... ;) :D

Deleted

OK, now back to business as usual. (Know a better way to document one's AVS adventure?)

Rolf's screenie is over 1 year old itself.

It is pretty incredible though, and shows just how far DLPs and LCDs still have to go. I feel the gap is more narrower than ever, but it's still a pretty wide gulf.

Just two years ago I couldn't agree more. Now in some ways I prefer digital over CRT. And, you don't need a Ruby either.

There's simply no other way. A great wealth of info as well as AVS history lies within. It's bump or perish here at AVS.
I'm off to save Scoob and Tryg's threads now.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=3117301&&#post3117301

Top right!

Archive bustin'. See ya next time,

[QUOTE=CMRA]As some members already know, I have been working on a series of DIY screen formulations in efforts to produce a better screen. Attached is a rather familiar image with a trio of panels projected onto. I request that members please post their preference, either left, top right, or bottom right. My eyes, after all, are only mine. Thank you.

Hi CMRA:

I have the following setup:

1. A 25' x 20' room with complete light control (in my basement).

2. Panasonic AX100 ceiling mounted at about 16' on a ceiling 7.5' high

3. Viewing distance about 20'

4. A complete wall at my disposal. Wall size is 12.5' x 7.5'

Which of your paint solutions will work well for my setup and max screen size
I can use (based on your experience)?

Thanx in advance!

regards,

Bhushan

Time marches on. Big Screen? Smoothvision? Try this:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=859818

Time marches on. Big Screen? Smoothvision? Try this:



Thanx a lot, CMRA. Looks like S-I-L-V-E-R is the answer! I was a little apprehensive as Panny AX100 is a fairly bright LCD and was wondering if a more gray screen would be in order. But I definitely believe in your experience (I personally don't have any) and will go with S-I-L-V-E-R.

Whats the biggest screen size I can use?

Thanx again,

Bhushan

Thanx a lot, CMRA. Looks like S-I-L-V-E-R is the answer! I was a little apprehensive as Panny AX100 is a fairly bright LCD and was wondering if a more gray screen would be in order. But I definitely believe in your experience (I personally don't have any) and will go with S-I-L-V-E-R.

Whats the biggest screen size I can use?

Thanx again,

Bhushan

4. A complete wall at my disposal. Wall size is 12.5' x 7.5' .(or less)

4. A complete wall at my disposal. Wall size is 12.5' x 7.5' .(or less)

Thanx again, CMRA. Will post some pictures on shutterfly once I am done!

regards,

Bhushan

Was the above an answer, CMRA? Or just a "Quote"?

blakhe, I'd hold up just a bit before jumping.



1. A 25' x 20' room with complete light control (in my basement).

<<< This situation allows you some leeway >>>

2. Panasonic AX100 ceiling mounted at about 16' on a ceiling 7.5' high


<<< That PJ allows you A LOT of leeway >>>

3. Viewing distance about 20'

<<< Interesting. That's quite far back as most seating set ups go. But it can/will work to your advantage the larger you go with your Screen and the Panny 100. More on this below.... >>>

4. A complete wall at my disposal. Wall size is 12.5' x 7.5'

Well, the larger you go, the less concerned you'll have to be over S-I-L-V-E-R's metallic content reacting adversely to the Panny's "uber-Lumens" of 2000 in Normal Lamp mode.

In fact, with you sitting so far back from the PJ's location, you could pull a "Bud" on us and create almost a floor to ceiling sized image.

Almost. Here is my recommended size.

130" x 73" (149" diagonal @ 16:9)

This size would leave you just over 6" space between your side walls and the outside edge of your Screen's Trim (@ 3" wide each side and Top ) and if you keep the bottom of the screen Trim at 6" off the Floor, you'll have the Top of the screen Trim at 5" from the Ceiling.

That my Friend is as close to having a "Virtual Reality Wall Vision" set up as you can get. You really can only go smaller from there. The location of the PJ will prevent anyone who is up off their seat and walking toward the screen from intersecting the PJ's light beam until they get about 8'-9' away from a 10' wide image, which will completely immerse them in what is going on before them.

I'm betting you'll want to move in closer yourself after having seen the end result of the sterling image quality. 20' away is in another county these days, especially if HD content is being shown.

However you'll need to consider the following as being absolutely necessary to avoid undue reflection from your Walls, Ceiling, and Floor.

Your going to have to go to a quite dark (and Flat hued) non-reflective surface on each location lest you collect and exhibit a great deal of your brightness off-screen on those surfaces, and effectively light up the entire end of the room.

I'd suggest that you consider painting the entire end of such a room a very dark but complimenting color out at least 6' into the room from the Screen wall. It need not be "Black" but it most definitely needs to be dark and non-reflective.

You can create what amounts to a "Shadow Box" where the Big Screen seems to float in a completely darkened space. But the coolest thing would be the "walk into the Image" effect you'd get from having a picture that stretches from Wall to Wall and Floor to Ceiling.

The Panny 100u is certainly up to the task in hand, and you can consider the use of either S-I-L-V-E-R or something in the Silver Fire family of paints (...those ARE easier to apply....3 coats over Kilz2 instead of 7-8) Both can support your having such a large screen, for your Foot lamberts at the screen size I've suggested is still a whoppin' 18 fl. which will easily give you the amount of off the screen brightness you'll want with such a huge image.

So if S-I-L-V-E-R's good for a Panny 100 it should be good for the Panny 900 then to?

All it is, is
64oz of Behr Faux Glaze
4 oz of Delta Silver metallic
and
24oz of filtered water?

Well along with the Kilz base.

So if S-I-L-V-E-R's good for a Panny 100 it should be good for the Panny 900 then to?

All it is, is
64oz of Behr Faux Glaze
4 oz of Delta Silver metallic
and
24oz of filtered water?

Well along with the Kilz base.

I thought it was 32 not 64oz. of glaze??????????????

I thought it was 32 not 64oz. of glaze??????????????

1/2 gallon = 64 0z =95% of Mix bulk (less water)

4 Oz of Delta SM = 5% of 64 Oz

(5% is actually 3.2 Oz but the SM is boosted to the higher amount for ease of mixing. It only helps.)

Was the above an answer, CMRA? Or just a "Quote"?

blakhe, I'd hold up just a bit before jumping.



Well, the larger you go, the less concerned you'll have to be over S-I-L-V-E-R's metallic content reacting adversely to the Panny's "uber-Lumens" of 2000 in Normal Lamp mode.

In fact, with you sitting so far back from the PJ's location, you could pull a "Bud" on us and create almost a floor to ceiling sized image.

Almost. Here is my recommended size.

130" x 73" (149" diagonal @ 16:9)

This size would leave you just over 6" space between your side walls and the outside edge of your Screen's Trim (@ 3" wide each side and Top ) and if you keep the bottom of the screen Trim at 6" off the Floor, you'll have the Top of the screen Trim at 5" from the Ceiling.

That my Friend is as close to having a "Virtual Reality Wall Vision" set up as you can get. You really can only go smaller from there. The location of the PJ will prevent anyone who is up off their seat and walking toward the screen from intersecting the PJ's light beam until they get about 8'-9' away from a 10' wide image, which will completely immerse them in what is going on before them.

I'm betting you'll want to move in closer yourself after having seen the end result of the sterling image quality. 20' away is in another county these days, especially if HD content is being shown.

However you'll need to consider the following as being absolutely necessary to avoid undue reflection from your Walls, Ceiling, and Floor.

Your going to have to go to a quite dark (and Flat hued) non-reflective surface on each location lest you collect and exhibit a great deal of your brightness off-screen on those surfaces, and effectively light up the entire end of the room.

I'd suggest that you consider painting the entire end of such a room a very dark but complimenting color out at least 6' into the room from the Screen wall. It need not be "Black" but it most definitely needs to be dark and non-reflective.

You can create what amounts to a "Shadow Box" where the Big Screen seems to float in a completely darkened space. But the coolest thing would be the "walk into the Image" effect you'd get from having a picture that stretches from Wall to Wall and Floor to Ceiling.

The Panny 100u is certainly up to the task in hand, and you can consider the use of either S-I-L-V-E-R or something in the Silver Fire family of paints (...those ARE easier to apply....3 coats over Kilz2 instead of 7-8) Both can support your having such a large screen, for your Foot lamberts at the screen size I've suggested is still a whoppin' 18 fl. which will easily give you the amount of off the screen brightness you'll want with such a huge image.

Thanx a lot, MississippiMan. That was a lot of useful information for a newbie like me. I am a First time PJ user and feeling a lot of enthusiasm in painting this huge wall screen in my basement. I will use a spray gun.

The question I had for you is that how will MississippiMud hold up against a Panny AX100 instead of S-I-L-V-E-R? I read the thread containing all the information and what got me interested was that I can use a gray primer with MississippiMud and if I get the basecoat of SM uniform and smooth, then I only have 1 topcoat to get right (instead of 2 topcoats with s-i-l-v-e-r).

How long do I give between each of the basecoats and topcoats to dry? Also, if I use a spray gun, then do I thin the basecoat / topcoat?

Pl. let me know.

Thanx,

Bhushan

Let the voting begin.

Last eve I got a call from MM himself. He's headed this way.
Should we have a "silver" shootout? His "HG" vs my original?

Voters?

yep i'd like to see that - it would actually be kinda nice to see a 5 panel shootout with:

S-I-L-V-E-R, SF, FnEasy with coating and the two laminates. getting the 5 most widely used methods together on one big screen would be awesome.

yep i'd like to see that - it would actually be kinda nice to see a 5 panel shootout with:

S-I-L-V-E-R, SF, FnEasy with coating and the two laminates. getting the 5 most widely used methods together on one big screen would be awesome.

Sorry, not my job. Here we simply determine the best 'silver' solution. The rest of the time (and money) is for the beach and beer.:D

lol - yeah i was just throwing it out there. i don't think that there is any one perfect screen but rather each one has it's strengths for different applications / projectors.

i'm kinda torn between silver and silver fire since probably 25% of my viewing will be times with ambient light.

Sorry, not my job. Here we simply determine the best 'silver' solution. The rest of the time (and money) is for the beach and beer.:D
CMRA, I understand you don't want to do an extensive test...but would you at least consider some shots with just a baseline white or neutral grey screen...with some screen shots of a black and white test pattern?

CMRA, I understand you don't want to do an extensive test...but would you at least consider some shots with just a baseline white or neutral grey screen...with some screen shots of a black and white test pattern?

I should still have a piece of "parkland" floating around. We'll see.

I should still have a piece of "parkland" floating around. We'll see.

Awesome, thanks!

In my experiences with both the Behr Silver Metallic and the Delta Silver Metallic I can describe the following differences.

The Behr SM has a darker and more blue-ish base coloration. The Delta SM is much lighter and thas less of a blue-ish tint to it. In the concentrations that are being used in the SILVER this blue-ish tint would be pretty insignificant and indeed may help to offset the warmer hue of the Kilz2.

Based on this photo provided by MississippiMan, it does indeed appear there are black specs in the Behr Silver Metallic:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Wall%20Prep%20and%20Painting/SilverontheLid.jpg
I have observed that silver flakes often look black or very dark from off angles. These black specs may actually be silver flakes at higher angles to the surface. Hard to tell from the photos.

The other big difference I notice is that the Behr Silver Metallic has a little lower concentration of mica flakes and they are very silvery looking. In fact when you clean up after using the Behr Silver metallic, it often looks like mercury floating on the surface of the water. The flakes in the Delta Silver Metallic are more like pearl flakes found in many other metallic and pearl craft paints. If you dilute some Delta SM in warm water you will see lots of mica flakes that sparkle and shimmer in different colors as well as silvery specs.

In this photo the silvery flakes from the Behr SM can be seen quite clearly:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Wall%20Prep%20and%20Painting/SilverMagnified.jpg

I would hypothesize then that the Delta SILVER will be slightly lighter in shade and possibly has a more diffused gain due to the higher concentration of mica flakes. By that I mean it's gain curve may be ever so slightly more gentle.

The common element is the Behr Faux Glaze. This is a fairly clear medium with a semi-gloss sheen when applied normally. For the SILVER it is applied using duster coats to create a texture that works with the sheen to create greater specularity and diffusion. This close up shows the texture quite clearly:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Wall%20Prep%20and%20Painting/SilverMagnified.jpg

In this photo of a Delta SILVER screen the texture is also evident.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/S-I-L-V-E-R%20SOLUTIONS/S-I-L-V-E-RfinalcoatmacroCRenhan-2.jpg

I would expect both of these implementations of SILVER to work very well. The sheen combined with a very dense texture works with the randomly oriented mica flakes to boost brightness without severely narrowing the viewing cone. The Delta SILVER will be slightly lighter in shade but the Behr SILVER may have a bit more particulate specularity due to the silvery flakes. In either case the reflective particles need to be evenly distributed and dense enough to have the same average density per pixel.

Anyway those are my speculations and I am eager to see some side-by-side photos of white light projected onto these surfaces.

It would be very informative to take a close enough shot to clearly see the pixel grid. This will help to explain the significance of texture and mica density relative to pixel density. With the introduction of higher resolution projectors this concept is becoming more important to understand. Actually this is an issue that depends on screen size also. The bottom line is that for a clear image that does not appear grainy the texture and flake density must be several times higher than the pixel density. You want several peaks and valleys of texture within a given pixel or else the screen starts to reflect each pixel differently. This is also true for the mica flakes. That variation in pixel reflection is stationary and will be quite noticeable in solid color panning scenes.

This should prove to be an interesting shootout.

I would expect both of these implementations of SILVER to work very well. The sheen combined with a very dense texture works with the randomly oriented mica flakes to boost brightness without severely narrowing the viewing cone. The Delta SILVER will be slightly lighter in shade but the Behr SILVER may have a bit more particulate specularity due to the silvery flakes. In either case the reflective particles need to be evenly distributed and dense enough to have the same average density per pixel.

Anyway those are my speculations and I am eager to see some side-by-side photos of white light projected onto these surfaces.

This should prove to be an interesting shootout.

Done. For those in question, see the S-I-L-V-E-R thread, page 9.

In this photo of a Delta SILVER screen the texture is also evident.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/S-I-L-V-E-R%20SOLUTIONS/S-I-L-V-E-RfinalcoatmacroCRenhan-2.jpg

HOLY COW!! :eek: Talk about color shifting iridescence!! Excellent picture of it right here! WOW! I took some microscope shots of mica based mixes but this one is great! Look at all the color shifts. I see reds, blues, greens... no doubt that these things are like little prisms!

Can't believe I missed this before! Yowsa!

mech

<excerpts from above>


Anyway those are my speculations and I am eager to see some side-by-side photos of white light projected onto these surfaces.

This should prove to be an interesting shootout.

Done. For those in question, see the S-I-L-V-E-R thread, page 9.

CMRA, are you saying that comparisons with white light are done? If so, can you point me to the post? The only pics I'm able to find in the thread that you mentioned are movie shots (and none are really bright scenes)...so the white (or a white/black) comparisons would be most interesting for me, too.

Oh, and what's with MM's obsession with Brad Pitt? Not that there's anything wrong with that...:)

<excerpts from above>





CMRA, are you saying that comparisons with white light are done? If so, can you point me to the post? The only pics I'm able to find in the thread that you mentioned are movie shots (and none are really bright scenes)...so the white (or a white/black) comparisons would be most interesting for me, too.

Oh, and what's with MM's obsession with Brad Pitt? Not that there's anything wrong with that...:)

In the past I had a PJ that had a B&W test pattern built in (squares). Sure would have made it easy to oblige. Can you think of a popular DVD that has the same?
Why the white light? Compare eveness of illumination?

In the past I had a PJ that had a B&W test pattern built in (squares). Sure would have made it easy to oblige. Can you think of a popular DVD that has the same?
Why the white light? Compare eveness of illumination?

Do you have the Avia or DVE calibration DVDs? They both have it. THX movies may also have it, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

Another option is to just make a black and white pattern in Microsoft Paint and send your computer display to the projector...

The white/black patterns give a direct look at which screen maximizes brightness of the white and depth of black. A solid white gives an idea of what effect the reflective properties of the screen have on image uniformity.

Do you have the Avia or DVE calibration DVDs? They both have it. THX movies may also have it, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

Another option is to just make a black and white pattern in Microsoft Paint and send your computer display to the projector...

The white/black patterns give a direct look at which screen maximizes brightness of the white and depth of black. A solid white gives an idea of what effect the reflective properties of the screen have on image uniformity.

Three years back I borrowed Avia for digital dispalys. The results were not much different than the THX results I got from a DVD. The image was flat, not unlike the default 'theater' mode standard with many PJs today.
Since then, I have learned to trust my eyes. I tune in my HD CRT direct view display then mimic same for projection. Works MUCH better for me.

Oh no, not HTPC again. I've got them. May they rest in peace. No sir, not since HDDVD and BD do I mess with them. My HD-A1, HD-A2, and PS3 do all my signal chores to the point I never look back.
I suppose I could hook one up...eventually. Even make my own B&W test pattern. Too busy and too lazy to mess with that now.

Three years back I borrowed Avia for digital dispalys. The results were not much different than the THX results I got from a DVD. The image was flat, not unlike the default 'theater' mode standard with many PJs today.
Since then, I have learned to trust my eyes. I tune in my HD CRT direct view display then mimic same for projection. Works MUCH better for me.

Oh no, not HTPC again. I've got them. May they rest in peace. No sir, not since HDDVD and BD do I mess with them. My HD-A1, HD-A2, and PS3 do all my signal chores to the point I never look back.
I suppose I could hook one up...eventually. Even make my own B&W test pattern. Too busy and too lazy to mess with that now.

CMRA, no one is suggesting that you put yourself out (to any extent) to meet this request. You make it sound as if the request is akin to asking you to run a marathon, when in fact...as you know...there is very little time or effort required in providing the requested data.

Not sharing simple black/white test patterns (and color bar test patterns) in side-by-side comparisons vs simple neutral greys (which are a simple, know quantity) is a choice you can make, I suppose...

Surely you realize that very little can be concluded from a careful selection of screenshots from movies, that are never posted in a side-by-side comparison with a similar shade of neutral grey? I and others have asked for it many times, so we can judge the merits of your solution for ourselves. It's great that you have calibrated eyes that you can trust while you view your screens in person. The rest of us have to rely on the data that you provide, and beyond just telling us how great things look, you are unwilling to provide this community with the data it needs to draw any objective conclusions (good or bad).

That choice that you make leads some to question the performance claims of your screen solution. After all, they wonder, if he won't post simple side-by-sides with a neutral grey baseline, then he must have a good reason. Is it that S-I-L-V-E-R fares no better than a neutral grey (or is the neutral grey actually better)?

So, it ends up leading to friction on the board. Some members frustrated because they feel like they can't make an objective judgment, others saying that it's clear from the screenshots that S-I-L-V-E-R is everything it's cracked up to be.

As the "owner" of the formula, you have within your power the means to end the debate. Or, at least shift the debate from one about conspiracy theories to a debate about the performance of the solution. You can do this by providing pics several test patterns on your S-I-L-V-E-R screen while it's side-by-side with a known neutral grey of a similar shade.

You can lay your hands on such test patterns in many ways:
1. Put in an Avia calibration disk...test patterns are on it
2. Put in a DVE calibration disk...test patterns are on it
3. If you don't have either of the above, you can borrow from a friend that does
4. Use some of these images that http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l84/tiddlerPics/Test%20Patterns/ posted...you can burn them to a CD if your DVD player will play picture CDs. Or, you can connect a VGA cable directly from your computer to your projector. Should take about 5 minutes to hook up...not asking you become a HTPC convert.
5. Use ANY THX movie...it has test images on it, also. Cars, for instance...

The requests to post vs a neutral grey screen are completely reasonable...in fact, they have become the standard by which mixes can be effectively judged. Movie screenshots of a screen by itself (or side-by-side with another screen with essentially the same advanced mix) simply aren't adequate to allow forum members to draw any useful conclusions.

After all, don't you want to take the opportunity to fairly demonstrate the advantages of S-I-L-V-E-R over a $10 can of Sherwin Williams Grey Screen that can be rolled on? I just don't understand it...I first requested this type of data a several months ago to another advanced mix owner. They gave me the "Yeah, I know what you're after...I'll see what I can do." I've since made the same request multiple times to each of the advanced mix owners. The response is always the same (they say they'll try to provide that data), and the result is always the same (they never come through). Many, many other forum members have made the exact same request.

I know that it's not a lack of time...because in the interim they've made hundreds/thousands of posts (in some cases, very long posts...like this one...which takes a lot of time), with hundred of additional screenshots of movies. The screenshots always have one thing in common...they're of a screen by itself, with no neutral grey reference to compare to.

I just don't understand it. I'm getting to the point that I'm starting to believe the conspiracy theorists...that there is very good reason the data hasn't been posted. Have I been naive all of this time thinking that useful data would be forthcoming? Maybe I have...

Relax. I have every intention of digging up my piece of Parkland polywall and perhaps another test panel of old and post a screenie. Look for it in the S-I-L-V-E-R thread.

Relax. I have every intention of digging up my piece of Parkland polywall and perhaps another test panel of old and post a screenie. Look for it in the S-I-L-V-E-R thread.

Relaxing...:)

Keep in mind that I wasn't only talking about S-I-L-V-E-R (and I recognize that's the only one under your control). It's just a general frustration with the advanced mixes, that thus far we've been unable to get on- and off-axis side-by-sides with a comparable shade of a simple neutral grey...and I just don't understand why that is.

I appreciate you doing this...it will help people make an important decision. It can be very overwhelming for a new person to come into the DIY screen forums (here or elsewhere)...there are 20 different solutions, and 20 different opinions about what the "best" solution is for a given HT setup. The only real unifying thread through all of the solutions is the ability to look at objective screenshots of a given solution with respect to a known neutral grey. To my knowledge, that's the best way to try to gsin insight into the performance of the many solutionis being presented. And, it makes things that much more difficult when that data doesn't exist for a whole class of mixes (the advanced metallics).

So, again...thank you for doing this for those interested in understanding more about the S-I-L-V-E-R mix.

Celebrating extinction.:)