Silver Fire mix

[pb_maxxx]

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/rsm_vs_silverfire.jpg

rs-maxxmudd (left panel) vs. silver fire screen

[prof55]

Looks great, PB. I'm looking forward to seeing the latest developments in this mix! :)

Garry

[schooner2000]

Thank you PB for making the change and in disgiuishing the DIY from commerical mixes now more clearly. Much appreciated.

[mynym]

Thanks PB.

Looks like there were a few changes to the mix too :)

[bigbassman64]

PB_Maxxx

Could you give the amount of color components to use,
for regular Silver Fire, is that 3 oz of each of those,
or is it broken down in ml, sorry I am slightly confused.
I am using RS-Maxxmudd, and could stand it to be
a little darker. screen shot you posted of the comparison
looks good.
Thanks for the help

[bigbassman64]

PB_Maxxx

Thanks I will give it a try this weekend.
Where can I find Windsor & Newton green.

thanks for sharing

[pb_maxxx]

micheals, hobby lobby, dick blick, or any college art supply store.

[Zipplemeyer]

How does this mix compare with the RSM mix under dark, controlled lighting?

Moe

[biglyle]

PB

Do you really find that the Windsor & Newton green actually works any better than the Delta pthalo green?

I have found no differance at all when trying indentical mixes with this being the only change.

[pb_maxxx]

biglyle,

everywhere i looked here in the states... the delta phthalo green was extremely hard to find. 1 out about 10 stores in my area had it. so in some ways... it was lack of delta thalo green that kept me from keeping everything uniform. as you know, getting this diy mix to it's simplest form was part of the goal.

now in terms of performance... yes i do think the w&n thalo green does a better job than the delta thalo green.
i guess the best way to describe it would be... i found more of a slight green deciency when using the delta thalo green.

one of the simplier tests i do with a color is to see what it looks like when you run a little water to it. the delta thalo green remained fairly dark and the range of the diluted color was fairly limited. the w&n had a much broader range of greens. obviously that's not scientific in any way, shape, or form... and it points more to transparency and color purity than anything else.

but if you take a look at the dnp thread on the screens forum when some of our (and i include you in this with your biylyle mix) original rgb formulas were compared to the dnp... the first things that jumps out at me is the lack of our mix's ability to produce green when the lights go on.

obviously, i don't have any science to prove it one way or another... just what is visually to me, screenshots, and an overall gut feeling on it.

[Zipplemeyer]

Does this have to be painted over a mirror or can it be applied to a white substrate like Sintra?

Moe

[Blanco]

With the formula listed above. Is it viscious enough to be sprayed as is, or do I need to add more water? I plan on spraying and am wondering if this formula is spayable, or if this is the roller formula.

[pb_maxxx]

zip,

the sintra works great. i personally use it all the time. i also do not personally feel this mix requires a mirror. every single screenshot i have ever shown here on avsforum is without the use of a mirror.

blanco,

you may or may not need to add water for right viscosity for your particular sprayer. it is all dependent on your sprayer, spray pressure, nozzle size, and spray fan. always test on a sample before starting in on your screen.

[Zipplemeyer]

if you take a look at the original post, you can see that in ambient conditions silver fire has a greater amount of contrast and holds it's image better than rsm.

and in controlled conditions the two virtually dissappear with the except of better black levels going silver fire.

So, the Silver mix has the same white level performance once the lights go out but deeper blacks than RSM? Are they both about the same gain?

Moe

[bittrix]

I've been lurking here for a *long* time, and it seems (intuitively) that pb is onto something exciting. The physics of it just feel right.

I'll be trying the SF mix on my new dedicated theatres' screenwall. Finished size will be 10-12 feet wide. The final skimcoat of finishing mud was floated on the wall this morning for that smoooooooth substrate. 2 coats primer (200 grit finish), 2 or 3 coats SF (rolled, sorry). and a week or 2 cure time, then I'll post some shots... (note to self - must start construction thread)

It is worth noting that the clerk at Michaels looked at me like I was about to mix explosives (Yes, I'm mixing them all together. No, I'm not telling you why muahahaha...)

[MississippiMan]

bittrix,

If your "Rollin", be sure to study up on the 'Rolling Tutorial' in Tiddler's thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=708009

Post *8

"SF" is a mix that is very thin in consistancy when mixed correctly, and your attempting a very large surface. The use of 3/16" Nap 9" Finish rollers is highly advisable. You'll need to have a plan of application that lets you produce sweeping strokes that thin out at appogee, but still carry enough paint to allow for a returning overlapping stroke. Working the edges with a light but increased pressure to flatten out and spread out any build up. Several light coats....no different than any correct "Finish painting" directions.

Just ask for advice if uncertain about anything. Ask not, and your end result can be judged only on the merits of your own abilities and intuition. Ask first...., and you can blame someone else. :D

[bittrix]

Ask first...., and you can blame someone else. :D

All advice gratefully accepted. I understand you've done one or two of these before :)

I gotta say... the whole AVS Forum has been like a masterclass to me in theatre design and construction. Every part of the project has it's own little world of expertise and experience; with acknowledged masters, old hands and "adventurers" selflessly sharing their secrets.

I don't want to stray from the topic at hand, but... I've watched the ongoing (and sometimes nasty) debate over commercial vs DIY... and have come to the conclusion that people like mm and pb should be thanked publicly for sharing their hard-earned knowledge and experience. Knowledge is a fluid that is hard to flask. Sure, some DIY stuff has made it into commercial products, but commercial products have always inspired DIY'ers as well. I cheerfully benefit from that arrangement.

(can you tell that drywall dust makes me wax poetic)

[Wet1]

Good stuff pb_m!

Any chance you could take some more pics under different light conditions and viewing angles? Also, do you have a feel for what the gain might be on the L or SL? Which of the three versions is shown above? Any sparkles or other negative attributes with this formulation?

I thought I had my mind made up to go with the DW Wilsonart laminate, but since I do have times where ambient lighting will be an issue, I'm starting to think something like your silver might be the best all around solution.

Thanks for all of your efforts!!!

[MississippiMan]

If ambient light is an issue, then by all means consider a true AL DIY application that addresses such. The DG laminate would offer up a little assistance in that respect, but would be more dependent of the amount of available PJ lumens to compenstate, whereas a AL Screen will optimize the use of such projected light while effectively rejecting (or muting) the effect of incoming sideways ambient light.

The DW or Sintra both would serve as good substrates. So would a nice smooth wall.

[Wet1]

If ambient light is an issue, then by all means consider a true AL DIY application that addresses such. The DG laminate would offer up a little assistance in that respect, but would be more dependent of the amount of available PJ lumens to compenstate, whereas a AL Screen will optimize the use of such projected light while effectively rejecting (or muting) the effect of incoming sideways ambient light.

The DW or Sintra both would serve as good substrates. So would a nice smooth wall.

I jumped on the JVC RS1 pre-buy and am looking forward to getting my new PJ in Feb. It's advertised lumens are ~700 @ D65 (maybe 450 or so at low bulb setting), and 15,000:1 CR (no DI). I'm going to be using this in a medium colored room, fair light control, 96" screen, seating at about 10' with the PJ mounted about the same. I'll also have some extra seating off to the side @ ~40* to the screen. I really don't want to see screen texture, this drives me nuts as an image is panned across the screen. At times I may have a little light spilling into the room from an adjoining room while entertaining. During the day there will certainly be some ambient light in the room (although I don't plan on using the PJ during the day very often).

I think my PJ will have good enough CR to pull off the white laminate, but since I will have a little light spilling in at times, I'm starting to think a silver such as this Silver Fire might be a better fit. How much will I gain and lose with the SF over the white laminate?

What do you think based on the info?



BTW, What is "AL" and "Sintra"?

[bittrix]

BTW, What is "AL" and "Sintra"?

AL = Ambient Light
Sintra = foamboard = closed-cell plastic foam sheet. Comes in different thicknesses. Usually used for mounting posters or photos, but is also a good substrate for cut vinyl in outdoor applications. It is very lightweight, has a very nice matte surface, is easy to cut, and is fairly dent resistant.

[Wet1]

AL = Ambient Light
Sintra = foamboard = closed-cell plastic foam sheet. Comes in different thicknesses. Usually used for mounting posters or photos, but is also a good substrate for cut vinyl in outdoor applications. It is very lightweight, has a very nice matte surface, is easy to cut, and is fairly dent resistant.
Excellent, thank you!

[pb_maxxx]

AL = screenshot below. Sintra = substrate the screenshot below was made from. :rolleyes:

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/pats_brady.jpg

[Wet1]

Would it be possible for you to post a couple of pics comparing the SF to a matte white screen under dark and light conditions as well as straight on and at an angle? A shot of the two without an image under bright light to show the shade of the SF would be very beneficial as well.

Also, which of the three SF formulations is being pictured?



I'm very impressed with what I've seen so far... keep up the great work!!!

[bud16415]

Would it be possible for you to post a couple of pics comparing the SF to a matte white screen under dark and light conditions as well as straight on and at an angle? A shot of the two without an image under bright light to show the shade of the SF would be very beneficial as well.

Also, which of the three SF formulations is being pictured?



I'm very impressed with what I've seen so far... keep up the great work!!!

MM
It’s been a couple weeks and I’m just wondering if there has been any time to get the side by side shots of the BFLFDIY or Delta Moon AKA Silver Fire.

The reason I ask is I have read a couple other similar requests made over the weekend this morning and I thought well maybe I should bring this request back up to the front. It seemed to be an ideal screen to compare on as it was made from the older style DIY mix and in a friends house that could be accessed to do the testing.

See thread: post #73
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=743287&page=3

If I remember right I was asking to see a side by side with the mix just sprayed over a white base not a mirror and then also a close neutral gray poly blend. That would be about the same range of gray as the BFLFDIY. I was hoping for those three together in the same images straight on and off axis and with and without the modest ambient lights not the full on the screen lights shown in some of the pictures.

I also made a similar request back in a thread concerning a small loft screen for a Sharp XR10X


It’s the only way I know of to even begin to understand and explain the properties of BFLFDIY. The only other way would be to make one or a test panel myself and test that in this manner. The problems being it has to be sprayed in a special manner. And I don’t know if I could hit that on a first try. Its always easier to compare the simple to the more complex.

[MississippiMan]

A little "Off Topic" comment. (PLEASE don't report me PB_ ! :eek: ;) :p )

I gotta teach ya how to Miter or Butt joint those corners, PB. ;)

I recently bought a simple yellow, inexpensive "Stanley" Miter Box /Hand Saw combo so as to return to doing all corners in a "Mitered" fashion. It's so much finer looking...., but oh so much more difficult to wrap Black Velvet around those 45 degree edges.

But the end results make it look as if one really made a conspicious effort toward having done a quality job. (...very important when your Peers come by your "pride & Joy" to inspect your work...) Butt Joints done perfectly with BV can be virutally invisible, but Miter Corners ARE invisible when done well.

A "More On Topic" item.

I made an effort to find both Sintra and DW Laminate this last week, and unfortunately came up with Nada but 4' x 8' material in the Sintra and nothing at 3 HDs as far as DW. They did not even have DW on their Color Chip Sheet! (...although it was in thier book.) Special orders for 5' x 10' stock are 3-4 weeks out from HD or Lowes, and a solid 4 weeks direct from the Mfgs for Sintra and other Plastic Sheeting (Mirrors included)

Being restrained to producing a Screen that measures under 100" is not my cup of Tea. :( It's only fortunate the last 2 screens were both out of necessity in the 92" diagonal range. But a 4 week wait? "#$%*&*$%^#$&2#^" !!! That's not condusive toward ANYBODY's desire to get something done when they want to do it.

When attempting the construction of a DIY Ambient Light capable screen with SF or any other similar application, the need to restrain the diagonal size does reap one the benefit of keeping as high a luminosity as possible on the screen's surface. Much brightness is usually lost with many AL applications due to the necessary attenuation of all light that strikes the screen's surface when it is anything less than a 1.0 - 1.4 gain surface. So as far as maximizing the light produced by a PJ, smaller is better. Usually.....unless you can find a surface that exhibits a better "reflectivity quotent" without also producing Hot Spotting or a noticable sheening effect when bright whites or colors are present.

The addition of a Poly-Based Top Coat furthers the advantage SF offers, and works to allow the use of a lower Lumen PJ than many owners would normally be able to avail themselves. Loss of viewing cone is not an issue if the right balance between reflectivity and the type of Room application is reached.

I'll be pursuing the creation of several "Non-Mirror" applications soon, wth the use of at least 4 different substrates, including both of the aforementioned materials as well as Sheetrock surfaces. Hopefully the presenting of such on this thread will help others see a wide selection of both applications and the end results.

These will not be "tests", but rather real life examples for others to use as they wish to either suggest, a course to take, justify the selection of such, or help realize what different applications the SF can be applied to.

To Bud:

I just saw your repeated request when I posted this missive. later this week I will indeed return to the "loft" with the Sharp SR10X to effect those screenies and a simple comparison test. That "DIY" formulated BF-Lite screen is in fact painted over a White "Kilz' primed drywall substrate. I'll have to check on getting a quart of neutral Grey mixed up though. Heck, for you, since you ask so very nicely...I'll even squirt a piece of mirror with both the DIY-BF and the Grey as well.

I'm glad I kept some of that specific mix around beyond the little "Touch Up" vial I left at the location for safe keeping.

[pb_maxxx]

mm,

naw. i'm pretty much an expert at that! actually, what you see is the sort of black banding i'm currently using. the banding isn't wraped around like the wood like velvet is... rather it is stretched from one side to the other (butted up against the edge of the wood) and stapled at the corner in the back. the screen is unfinished the and there will be a black finish trim butted up against the bare wood around the entire screen. (you just don't see the unfinished bare wood on the other three sides from this extreme angle! :D )

---------------------------------

Wet1 & Tiddler,

i'll put up those bare screen photos of a SF Superlite and test BOC screen so you get some idea of the color difference.

i also took a couple pics of the bears game yesterday with more modest ambient light conditions from a couple of different angles so you can see this beauty with much less light present. viewing cone is definitely not an issue.

[Wet1]

I just saw your repeated request when I posted this missive. later this week I will indeed return to the "loft" with the Sharp SR10X to effect those screenies and a simple comparison test. That "DIY" formulated BF-Lite screen is in fact painted over a White "Kilz' primed drywall substrate. I'll have to check on getting a quart of neutral Grey mixed up though. Heck, for you, since you ask so very nicely...I'll even squirt a piece of mirror with both the DIY-BF and the Grey as well.

I'm glad I kept some of that specific mix around beyond the little "Touch Up" vial I left at the location for safe keeping.

Would it be possible for you to throw a matte white sample in the comparison as well for reference?

I'm very much looking forward to seeing your results! :)

[Wet1]

Wet1 & Tiddler,

i'll put up those bare screen photos of a SF Superlite and test BOC screen so you get some idea of the color difference.

i also took a couple pics of the bears game yesterday with more modest ambient light conditions from a couple of different angles so you can see this beauty with much less light present. viewing cone is definitely not an issue.
Excellent!!! I'm excited to see how they look in low light and bright conditions! :)

[Wet1]

up next... a 100" 1/16" acrylic mirror... it sickens me to be forced to do this?! :rolleyes:

Has anyone definitively determined if there's any benefit to using a mirrored surface rather than a white base? With this many layers of paint over the top, I have a hard time believing much of the light can make it down to the mirror and then all the way back to the surface... I'd think the difference would be nearly unnoticeable. :confused:

What's the cost of a 4'x8' sheet of acrylic mirror anyway?

[MississippiMan]

Now that's a question loaded for Bear! I've done a very many of 'em and always received good reviews. A few other AVS'er have done 'em and been less than enthusiastic, but the majority who "nailed it" through help and pro-offered advice have been quite satisfied.

Even so, although I see and note a difference....PB_ so far has not.

IMO, the darker the mix is that coats the surface, the more easier it is to cover it with "THIN" layers of the mix, and the more advantageous the presence of a Mirror returning light to the rear of that surface becomes.

Perhaps after PB_ recovers from the malaise of using a mirror, the use thereof of one only 1/16" thick (...instead of the usual 1/8") will show him a result that might change his mind.

It's more the availability and affordability of the other materials in "normal" sizes that makes them attractive, and so being, up to now all PB_ efforts have revolved around such applications. Me? I'm the "Mirror Man"

But not for long, maybe.

Cost of a 4' x 8' Acrylic Mirror ranges from $85.00 to $97.00 at most any Plastic Sheeting Supply Co.

[pb_maxxx]

what i've tried to say is that i don't believe a mirror is necessary for this mix to work very well.

but actually, there is a definite difference between the two... and a mirror has both positives and negatives that i have personally seen.

the positives...

better white levels. you will get better whites with a mirror. explosions will be more white. the shine that often travels across the edge of lettering (such as the THX lettering) or the edge of a sword's blade, etc are more pronounced and dimensional with a mirror. it's defnitely an effect that can not be captured in a screen shot.

better black levels. the silver base of the mirror results in deeper black levels.

potentially better black level detail. highlights and detail within the deeper black levels are potentially better dependent on the greyness and the thickness of the topcoat.

cons...

poorer flesh tones - i'm very much a stickler for good flesh tones... and i want the flesh tones to come as close to or match that of white screen as possible. (a very hard thing to do whenever grey / silver is present within the basecoat or topcoat). the silver base of the mirror tends to effect the flesh tones and make them a tad darker than i personally like. beyond the superlight... i'm not as happy with the flesh tones on a mirror as i would personally like.

the color spectrum from the light to mid yellows, some light greens, and some light reds can also be adversely effected as well by the silver mirror base. the shift is slight and noticable only when a white sample is present.

now as far as widening the viewing cone and increasing the ambient capabilities of the mix... i will reserve my judgement for a later date.

-----------

Wet1,

now as far as whether light is penetrating the topcoat... the answer is a definite yes. even after 4 rolled coats of silver fire mix on a white semi-translucent acrylic #2447... the image is clearly seen on the backside and could easily be used a rear projection screen in controlled lighting.

[bud16415]

Has anyone definitively determined if there's any benefit to using a mirrored surface rather than a white base? With this many layers of paint over the top, I have a hard time believing much of the light can make it down to the mirror and then all the way back to the surface... I'd think the difference would be nearly unnoticeable. :confused:

What's the cost of a 4'x8' sheet of acrylic mirror anyway?

If you want a good explanation of how much light passes thru a layer of paint or multi layers read this thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=713810

I had suggested to Tiddler to try painting a window so we could see the projected image on the back side. The discussion starts at post #5 images #11 #18 and the real fun starts on #37. He also painted mirrors (rolled) and tested them in that thread.

IMO this is the best test thread I have read to date.

As for flesh tones and grays. The thumbnail images below were shot on a coal black screen with tremendously high light concentration.
The thread that explains that experiment is:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=743468

http://thumb2.webshots.net/t/53/653/8/57/23/2621857230068493142dtiIkq_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2621857230068493142dtiIkq)

http://thumb2.webshots.net/t/59/459/0/15/28/2980015280068493142vdrsWW_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2980015280068493142vdrsWW)

[pb_maxxx]

bud,

very few projectors have the ability to overpower the substrate such as your demonstration from less than 3 feet. however, due to the fuzziness of the images and with no white test screen present as a control... from the images you showed.. they do not tell the whole story. it is easy to show screenshots of flesh tones that appear to be pleasing on a grey screen until a white control is also present to show the difference. obviously this means you are close, but without the control you have no idea how off/shifted your flesh tones really are.


over and over again a control screen is asked of myself and for the most part i have complied with that request. however, i do find it odd though that in recent breakthroughs of greys and topcoats, etc, that only tiddler supplied a control screen in his screenshots.

if nothing else, any time light is altered my matter (pigment) there is a visual consequence... be it good or bad.

[bud16415]

bud,

very few projectors have the ability to overpower the substrate such as your demonstration from less than 3 feet. however, due to the fuzziness of the images and with no white test screen present as a control... from the images you showed.. they do not tell the whole story. it is easy to show screenshots of flesh tones that appear to be pleasing on a grey screen until a white control is also present to show the difference. obviously this means you are close, but without the control you have no idea how off/shifted your flesh tones really are.


over and over again a control screen is asked of myself and for the most part i have complied with that request. however, i do find it odd though that in recent breakthroughs of greys and topcoats, etc, that only tiddler supplied a control screen in his screenshots.

if nothing else, any time light is altered my matter (pigment) there is a visual consequence... be it good or bad.

I couldn’t agree more with what you just posted above and I’m among the biggest advocates of a comparison in all screen shots that are trying to make any kind of definitive statement about how light is handled off of a screens face or its inner mirror or anything else it does to the light.

There is a thread now running that talks about just these issues and how we can across the net with limited equipment review each others work and try and understand what they are doing and why.

One of the problems is its also been determined that most if not all whites also alter colors thru their pigments. When we are talking about screens that reflect light the ones with the greatest opportunity to alter colors are the ones that reflect the most of them. In the case of lamp black it has a couple of good points. First its concentration in most mixes is very slight. The thumbnails I posted have at least a 1000 times the black as any neutral or non neutral screen paints. So the first good point is not much of it. The second good thing about it is it keeps over 90% of the light that hits it. Bad for gain good for not changing colors.

On the other hand the white base we might want to uses as a standard is a very good reflector and when it pushes a color it does so with strong reflecting pigments.

I know the experiment I did was not to make a screen of black pigment only for some super lumen projector of the future. What I was trying to point out is first how the entire spectrum “can” be reflected from what appears to be black to our eyes and then how that black didn’t alter even white light or light colors such as skin tones.

The logic was something like this. If a smidgen of black turns skin tones blue a whole boat load should have made them look like the Blueman Group. That didn’t happen and I’m sure my black craft paper was far from a gray neutral but it was sucking up so much light it didn’t get to alter the colors much.

The reason the pictures are out of focus is clear I ran out of focal length at the short throw required for the experiment. I could maybe repeat it with a lens in front of the projector and get it in focus and add a white reference. At that close the whites blacks and all the colors will be pretty washed out I’m sure 1000 plus foot lamberts.

[pb_maxxx]

One of the problems is its also been determined that most if not all whites also alter colors thru their pigments.

i couldn't agree with you more that maybe white shouldn't be the control that we've made it out to be. i find (and have mentioned before) that because it's so poor at absorbing light... that arguments could be made it alters/shift color by shifting it towards white and hence, a slight washout of the entire color spectrum aside from white itself. unfortunately, until many more minds are in agreement with us... it appears that is what we are faced with as a control comparison.

also, i wasn't knocking the fuzziness of the pics... i'm master of the fuzzy hand held pics myself.

i enjoyed your test and it did solidify something for me along with your statement "The second good thing about it is it keeps over 90% of the light that hits it. Bad for gain good for not changing colors."

...and that is, a very dark screen such as the one i showed of j-lo and a very light grey screen are far easier to get color correct and pleasing to my eye than a medium grey screen. i hoping soon that i'll soon be able to go back to test that very dark grey screen.

[Wet1]

i couldn't agree with you more that maybe white shouldn't be the control that we've made it out to be. i find (and have mentioned before) that because it's so poor at absorbing light... that arguments could be made it alters/shift color by shifting it towards white and hence, a slight washout of the entire color spectrum aside from white itself. unfortunately, until many more minds are in agreement with us... it appears that is what we are faced with as a control comparison.
While I agree with you guys, I think we need to stick to white as a control because it's the closest thing we can all use as a reference... trying to reliably mass reproduce any other hue or color with precision (while still keeping it cheap and readily available) becomes very difficult. :)

[pb_maxxx]

tiddler, wet1,

as requested, here's a photo of the screen color of a silver fire superlite without an image on it.

aside from the white walls as a color reference... i also have a BOC screen for comparison as well.

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/blank_screen.jpg

[benven]

If I recall correctly, the CG series of mixes did just as well if not a better job. This statement is based on my own testing, observations and threads.

pb, that last picture of yours really doesn't tell us anything other than the SF is a silver colour. Looks alot like my CGIII screen. Could you please throw an image on your last picture of a white screen on your SF screen. Please take a 45 and 90 degree off axis shot as well. I really would like to compare what flesh tones look like off axis.

wet1, in my experimentation, I see no benefit of a mirrored substrate. IMO, a nice matte white substrate is the way to go. You can get more bang for your buck with pearl flake added to the mix.

[Wet1]

here's a photo of the screen color of a silver fire superlite.

aside from the white walls as a color reference... i also have a BOC screen for comparison as well.

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/blank_screen.jpg
Great! That's about the shade I'm looking for, I'm not crazy about going into the darker grays. Superlite looks like the choice for me given the three shades.

Any chance you could post a few pics of that same screen (with images) and BOC under several on and off axis viewing conditions with & w/o the ambient light?

I'm 95% sold on this mix compared to other DIY or even commercial screens, but I find it very strange in all the threads I've looked through researching these silver mixes, I'm yet to see good pics of any of the silver mixes compared to a white screen under light AND dark conditions as well as on and off axis. This concerns me. It seems so elementary, yet nobody has posted these photos... why not??? :confused:

[bud16415]

I'm 95% sold on this mix compared to other DIY or even commercial screens, but I find it very strange in all the threads I've looked through researching these silver mixes, I'm yet to see good pics of any of the silver mixes compared to a white screen under light AND dark conditions as well as on and off axis. This concerns me. It seems so elementary, yet nobody has posted these photos... why not??? :confused:

They are coming , I’m told this week. :)

The best comparisons to date are in the link I posted to you above.
Post #37

[Wet1]

They are coming , I’m told this week. :)

The best comparisons to date are in the link I posted to you above.
Post #37
So I hear, I'm very much looking forward to them! I'm not suggesting pb is trying to hide anything, but I do find it strange these images haven't been posted (by anyone) a long time ago to validate these mixes...

[pb_maxxx]

Wet1,

actually there have been many such pics posted... but somehow they seem to get lost amonst the bickering and closed threads.

here's a couple from the past... (white mmud background vs. dark silver sample)
http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/blkflame1.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/blkflame2.jpg

and another one from the past... (polywall vs. silver fire)
http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/blkflame12.jpg

i've got a couple more... but i'm at work with no access to them at the present time.

[Wet1]

I've seen the first couple of pics, but not the last one. Unfortunately, I can't see much on that last photo (Beast) due to the POS monitor I have at work.

What I'm really looking to see is how the SF Superlite compares to a matte white screen under dark conditions (I know it will look better under ambient light). Are the whites as white, or are they a little dirty? Are the colors accurate? Are they vivid? How do the two compare when color bars are shown? Is the viewing cone similar? I look forward to seeing your pics which can answer these questions.

Thanks again for all of your contributions!!! :)

[Wet1]

BTW, any idea what kind of gain you're seeing with these screens?

[prof55]

Unsubstantiated claims and argumentative responses have been removed.

Now, let's get back on topic. :)

Garry
AVS Moderator

[benven]

Boys relax. I am not disagreeing with the fact that MM and pb helped alot of people.

But, please read what MM wrote and tell me he ain't blowing smoke?? The best gray screen bar none? Are you kidding me? Have you seen any data to back that up? Have you seen any comparison shots of other gray screens? We just got a bunch of shots of a white screen against a gray screen in ambient light. How come no off axis shots like I requested? How come no other gray screen to compare against like I asked? Or how come no dark shot like wet1 requested. No paint chip on my shoulder, just want some facts, not BS.

Many people have asked for screen shots or data. They continue to skirt around these questions and then come on here with very leading, inciteful statements. If they just provided the information, all would be well. However, no information and then some pretty hefty statements, you're just asking for trouble here.

So bittrix, if you think my statements are unfair, untrue and uncalled for, then I would think MM's statements are also untrue, unfair and uncalled for.

wet1, please do a search on threads I have started and you can read up about the CG series of mixes. Not alot of people tried them, but those who did, really liked them. Check out the CGIII thread that I asked to be closed down because of behaviour like this.

[benven]

Sorry Garry. I'll stay on topic and try not to respond in an argumentative manner.

[pb_maxxx]

wet1,

here's some flesh tones for you... (boc screen is inset)

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4269.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4373.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4384.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4388.jpg

[benven]

Still no off axis shots? I did ask nicely, didn't I??

[Wet1]

Thanks for posting those pb! I'll have to check those out on my monitor at home tonight... as I stated above, my monitor at work is absolute garbage for anything other than reading text.

I did get a chance to take a good look at your Beast photo last night. I'm impressed with what I'm seeing, but with the blue makeup, it's difficult to see how accurate everything is. I can't wait to see these latest pics tonight on my monitor as they look like they'll be much more informative.

From what I can tell so far, it appears there's very little degradation to the picture under low lighting and an obvious improvement with ambient light pressent... exactly what I'm looking for. It seems there's a noticeable increase in gain over the BOC (on axis). I still haven't heard any gain numbers, but based on my crappy monitor it appears to be around ~1.5, am I in the right ballpark?

My next concern is off axis viewing. I do have seating at about 40* to the screen so this is very much a concern for me. I realize these are probably file pics you have posted from your computer, but if you could supply some off axis shots of the same frame (with BOC) on axis and off, it would be very much appreciated.

BTW, can I assume these pics you've posted are of the darker SF and not the 'Lite' or 'Superlite' versions? If this is the case, similar pics of the Superlite would be very much appreciated!

Thanks again! :)

[bud16415]

Thanks for posting those pb! I'll have to check those out on my monitor at home tonight... as I stated above, my monitor at work is absolute garbage for anything other than reading text.

I did get a chance to take a good look at your Beast photo last night. I'm impressed with what I'm seeing, but with the blue makeup, it's difficult to see how accurate everything is. I can't wait to see these latest pics tonight on my monitor as they look like they'll be much more informative.

From what I can tell so far, it appears there's very little degradation to the picture under low lighting and an obvious improvement with ambient light pressent... exactly what I'm looking for. It seems there's a noticeable increase in gain over the BOC (on axis). I still haven't heard any gain numbers, but based on my crappy monitor it appears to be around ~1.5, am I in the right ballpark?

My next concern is off axis viewing. I do have seating at about 40* to the screen so this is very much a concern for me. I realize these are probably file pics you have posted from your computer, but if you could supply some off axis shots of the same frame (with BOC) on axis and off, it would be very much appreciated.

BTW, can I assume these pics you've posted are of the darker SF and not the 'Lite' or 'Superlite' versions? If this is the case, similar pics of the Superlite would be very much appreciated!

Thanks again! :)

The best definitive answers to both the above requests can be found in the thread I mentioned above and I will link again below.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=713810

Wet1 is absolutely right in his assumption of improved gain IMO.

The major contributing elements in this paint mix are not to far removed from the paint Tiddler tested in the above link. And as such I feel react the same way.

This paint along with the others of its type are very good at doing what they are designed to do. They are slight gray in color, that enhances their ambient performance, thru the use of clear poly and metallic they become both more efficient and at the same time more directionally gain dependent. Also not a bad thing depending on your room seating conditions and projectors output. And now in this latest version PB has made additional color correction tweaks in the form of the (color component) mixture that can then be proportionally blended into the mix.

All good stuff IMO

If there is a down side to this type paint it would be in the skill involved in applying it over some of the simpler flatter non metallic paints. This was pointed out as of late by one member after extensive testing and practice painting with metallic paints felt his skill level still wasn’t high enough to risk trying metallic on his roll down project.

These are my thoughts on how this type paints work. They are just my opinions and I could be wrong. :)

[bud16415]

wet1,

here's some flesh tones for you... (boc screen is inset)

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4269.jpg



Another thing to keep in mind when viewing a screen shot like the one above I quoted is calibration and not even color calibration but just simply brightness calibration. Assuming that one of the major differences in the two screen surfaces above is gain the BOC a white .8 and the SF a 1.5 gray, keeping in mind I just guessed at both numbers.

If the lumens were cranked up to a point that the BOC was a relative brightness as what we see the SF at in the picture we would then perceive the screen quality totally different. We would then be saying the BOC is a nice bright richly colored image and the SF has a too bright washed out black look.

That’s the reason simply showing a white reference panel in a screen shot is not the answer to all questions. If when we put the 1.0 gain white in the picture we then calibrated to it and took a set of pictures on and off axis then we calibrated to the screen and repeated the screen shots, those of us with inquiring minds would go “Wow this is a great example of a very efficient screen raised to a gain that has a slightly silver gray appearance to the naked eye under low levels, it also seems to be gray neutral and gives great performance under some low to med ambient light.” We could then assume some viewing cone and also the amount of FL we could expect to get if we ether had a lower lumen projector or hopes of a very large screen.

[bud16415]

The thumbnail below I loaded into photo shop and applied a value of 75 to brightness it comes in at a value of 50 on a scale of 0 to 100 as a means of comparison. I know this is not the same thing as calibrating the projector to a lower gain screen but I did it as a point of reference to illustrate my comment in the above post.

http://thumb2.webshots.net/t/53/153/4/72/69/2740472690068493142YUXLfK_th.jpg (http://home-and-garden.webshots.com/photo/2740472690068493142YUXLfK)

[pb_maxxx]

wet1, my personal screen (in these pics) is a superlite one... and the same screen as the above one without an image.

right now i'm at work so i'll have to disappoint anyone else's requests until this evening...

but in the meantime, here's a couple of off-axis pics as requested...

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4376.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4389.jpg

as i have increased ever so slightly the gain of this mix, i've also come to accept that a slight viewing cone will come into play. so yes, it does have a slight cone, but it's very uniform and wider than you would originally suspect. now what was interesting to me, and one that's not often discussed, is that boc also has a simliar cone (though slightly wider) cone as well.

[prof55]

Pete: Just for clarification, are the pictures in posts 42, 53, and 59 all of the same screen and boc?

Garry

[pb_maxxx]

yes that's correct. the screen and boc in post #42 were used for all of the on-axis and off-axis skin tone pics that were taken last night while watching ppv on the dish network last night... during the feedings of my twins... and generally ticking off my wife because of the constant freeze, take pics from the front, take pics from the side and freeze again...

[bud16415]

PB

I’m assuming you are projecting to the coated side of the BOC as apposed to the cloth side. And it’s interesting you noticed the viewing cone of BOC.

Your SF looks to stand up well to off angle viewing and what seems to be happening is that even though the BOC is lower gain / darker in the front position it drops off as fast if not faster than the SF. Says good things about SF but really points out BOC is great for stopping light coming thru a window but not so good as a screen material. When I first played with BOC I had enough lumens to light it up and I actually liked the image on the cloth side better.

[Wet1]

PB,

Thanks for taking some of the requested pics, I look forward to getting home tonight to take a better look at them! :)

[benven]

Is it just moi, or does the BOC cloth do a better job with black levels? Also, in the slightly off axis shots in post 59, IMO, the BO cloth looks better. Blacks are blacker. Also, the flesh tones in post 53 look more lifelike to me. Obviously, the SF has more gain and looks brighter. But the skin colourations are "warmer" with the BOC and "cooler" on the SF. Don't know if this is what it looks like in real life. Obviously, no ambient light. In the case of ambient light, the SF would have better black level retention.

[biglyle]

I mixed up a batch of this last night (light) and can easily see why some people have had trouble rolling this mix. Far too much metallics in it to roll worth a sh!t. Keep in mind I have been in the painting biz for nearly 20 years and have rolled about 5000 gallons of paint in my hay day, and I found this mix a bitch to work with.
The screen is fairly shiney, and a medium/soft grey, with a hint of possible blueness.
As for the image (only a day old).
Black levels - nothing special at all. I think that the large amount of metallics causes a lot of harm to the black levels. It also cause a lot of screen door in the bright scenes.
Whites - way too much screen door enhancement on very bright white scenes.
Colors - colors had excellent pop, this is where the metallics work thier best.

Personally, I prefer a flatter finish screen with a lot less metallics in it, especially in dark room viewing. Even in ambient light i found the metallics in this mix causing problems.

[mech]

Is it just moi, or does the BOC cloth do a better job with black levels? Also, in the slightly off axis shots in post 59, IMO, the BO cloth looks better. Blacks are blacker. Also, the flesh tones in post 53 look more lifelike to me. Obviously, the SF has more gain and looks brighter. But the skin colourations are "warmer" with the BOC and "cooler" on the SF. Don't know if this is what it looks like in real life. Obviously, no ambient light. In the case of ambient light, the SF would have better black level retention.
I always take pix with a grain of salt. However I'd have to agree with you on this. I thought the BOC looked better in all of the dark shots. :confused:

mech

[Wet1]

Is it just moi, or does the BOC cloth do a better job with black levels? Also, in the slightly off axis shots in post 59, IMO, the BO cloth looks better. Blacks are blacker. Also, the flesh tones in post 53 look more lifelike to me. Obviously, the SF has more gain and looks brighter. But the skin colourations are "warmer" with the BOC and "cooler" on the SF. Don't know if this is what it looks like in real life. Obviously, no ambient light. In the case of ambient light, the SF would have better black level retention.
I got a chance to look at the pics last night. For the most part I agree with you. With that said, I don't think I've ever seen a grey or silver (metallic?) screen that will outperform a white screen in recreating accurate and true colors in dark conditions. White is simply king IMO IF you don't need the gain and have good light control. The problem is white goes to crap really fast once a little light is introduced... which is why many people such as myself even consider a screen like this.

I couldn't really tell if the blacks were much better one way or another, but I think the edge would have to go to the BOC. I guess that's also the nature of the beast when you add gain though... to the best of my knowledge, as gain is increased, blacks become lighter.

I think Bud had a good point about the contrast calibration for the screen. The flesh tones look fairly good on the SF, but a little washed out compared to the BOC. I suspect dropping the contrast would warm things up a little.

Gain can play tricks on the eyes and it can certainly be a double edged sword. It's nice to see the bright pic, but it also tends to wash everything out a little... including blacks.


I mixed up a batch of this last night (light) and can easily see why some people have had trouble rolling this mix. Far too much metallics in it to roll worth a sh!t. Keep in mind I have been in the painting biz for nearly 20 years and have rolled about 5000 gallons of paint in my hay day, and I found this mix a bitch to work with.
The screen is fairly shiney, and a medium/soft grey, with a hint of possible blueness.
As for the image (only a day old).
Black levels - nothing special at all. I think that the large amount of metallics causes a lot of harm to the black levels. It also cause a lot of screen door in the bright scenes.
Whites - way too much screen door enhancement on very bright white scenes.
Colors - colors had excellent pop, this is where the metallics work thier best.

Personally, I prefer a flatter finish screen with a lot less metallics in it, especially in dark room viewing. Even in ambient light i found the metallics in this mix causing problems.


First, thank you for giving this formula a try. I realize the paint hasn't fully cured yet, but I'm sure your observations are still valid. BTW, I have to agree, with all that metallic I wouldn't even think of trying to roll this formula. Spraying is a MUST IMO. Even when spraying, it can be very difficult to apply heavy metallic evenly, there are just so many variables which can cause inconsistencies in the lay of the metallics.

Regarding your observations:

Blacks - I suspect you're correct when you say the metallics detract from the black levels. Like I said above, there's no free lunch when it comes to adding gain. Wouldn't adding more of the color components improve black levels (at the cost of some gain)? What about dropping the PJ contrast a little?

Whites - I would think this formula would offer very good whites. You mention too much SDE, but isn't the screen just magnifying the deficiencies in your PJ? What about for a user who's using a 1080p machine with good fill or a CRT? Would they be happy with the whites from this screen?

Color - Is the 'pop' you're seeing the increase in gain, or was something else happening with the colors? How was the accuracy?

What kind of problems were you seeing regarding the metallics under ambient light? Does the screen have too much shine to it? What would you do to make it a little more flat? After giving this a try, which of the 3 formulations would you pick if you were to do it again and why?

Also, please re-evaluate the screen after a week and see if your thoughts change at all. Pics would be great! Thanks again!!! :)

[benven]

I got a chance to look at the pics last night. For the most part I agree with you. With that said, I don't think I've ever seen a grey or silver (metallic?) screen that will outperform a white screen in recreating accurate and true colors in dark conditions. White is simply king IMO IF you don't need the gain and have good light control. The problem is white goes to crap really fast once a little light is introduced... which is why many people such as myself even consider a screen like this.

I couldn't really tell if the blacks were much better one way or another, but I think the edge would have to go to the BOC. I guess that's also the nature of the beast when you add gain though... to the best of my knowledge, as gain is increased, blacks become lighter.

wet1, I agree that blacks become lighter with higher gain but we are seeing lighter blacks off axis also. I also agree that white is king. I have said it many times, I would have a white screen, but I have way too much afternoon light coming in.

Check out this little experiment.....CGIII in the background, new high gain silver mix on the left panel and a matte white painted piece of foamboard on the right.

No flash, with flash

http://show.imagehosting.us/show/1784663/25972/user_25972/T1_25972_1784663.JPG (http://www.imagehosting.us/index.php?action=show&ident=1784663) http://show.imagehosting.us/show/1784660/25972/user_25972/T1_25972_1784660.JPG (http://www.imagehosting.us/index.php?action=show&ident=1784660)

Notice how dark the white foamboard is under the flash and notice how bright the silver panel is. Much brighter than the background CGIII that was measured at a gain of 1.8. The silver panel is returning alot of light. Agree?

Now look at these pictures. Not the greatest, I know, I am horrible with a camera.

On axis, off axis lights off

http://show.imagehosting.us/show/1784628/25972/user_25972/T1_25972_1784628.JPG (http://www.imagehosting.us/index.php?action=show&ident=1784628) http://show.imagehosting.us/show/1784634/25972/user_25972/T1_25972_1784634.JPG (http://www.imagehosting.us/index.php?action=show&ident=1784634)

On axis, blacks are a little lighter, not alot, on the high gain silver panel as compared to the white panel. However, off axis, blacks are nice and deep. Colours are really good. IMO, better than the CGIII background. Hard to tell from those shots but that is what I see.

No sense putting up an ambient shot because we know what that would look like.

The new silver mix does not get any gain from sheen. That is what I am thinking is going on here with the SF mix. Sheen is probably playing a larger role in developing gain rather than metallics. And that is why we see that effect on and off axis. In my silver mix, I am soley relying on metallics to make gain. The are suspended in a matte translucent base. The translucent silver topcoat is then applied over a matte white base, like the one to the right. I have observed that good on/off axis performance is one big plus for this type of screen. You can get excellent gain and preserve some semblence of off axis performance.

Anyway, not to hijack the thread just discussing the statements made.

[pb_maxxx]

yes, there are a few aspects where it's very hard to beat white but overall even in a controlled environment i very much prefer an extremely light gray. so, i'll respectfully disagree with white being king.

having said that, i have presented the SF info in a very balanced manner. i do agree with you guys that in the 1st photo and the halle screenshot that the flesh tones have a slightly warmer feel to them. but notice that are talking about warmer and cooler which can easily be calibrated to your personal liking and not something that's deficient. however in the other two flesh tone shots and the off axis shot, i very much prefer the SF... to me it's not even close. i have always highlighted benven's accomplishments and in both his case and SF... i don't have any doubts other diy greys screen do not come very close.

now in the case of the black levels, the metallics are definitely the gain factor that's seen here. you can certainly get better black levels by ever so slightly increasing the color components... but i personally prefer the mix with 1oz of color or less. this screen mix if done correctly has little to no sheen to it... so sheen is not a factor.

benven, the flash experiment you did is the exact same thing that happens when SF is taken with a flash vs a white screen. on axis the SF has greater gain and better whites. you can easily see it here with this explosion shot.

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/IMG_4398.jpg


now with respect to your on axis screenshot... your black levels are very noticably lighter. much more noticeable than the SF screenshots. off-axis the black levels look very nice.

yes you did hijack the thread a bit... but i really think your mix is deserving of it's own thread... and that's something i've also said.

[biglyle]

How can you say this mix has little to no sheen when every ingredient except one is satin finish or higher (the metallics paint dry to an eggshell finish)?

This mix is between satin and eggshell in sheen, at least from my observations.

[benven]

Well said biglyle.

Yes, the SF does have some nice gain on axis, but off axis is a different story. The biggest shortcoming of high gain gray screens is off axis performance. SF falls into that category. You try and bring up white levels at the sacrfice of cone and off axis performance. That's physics for you. I have no doubt that the SF off axis performance is affected by sheen. A flat mix will provide better off axis performance.

I don't see the need to start a thread on my latest mix becuase, as I have stated many times, it will not be made public.

[pb_maxxx]

again, SF when done correctly has little to no sheen. certainly not enough to effect it's performance in any visible manner.

SF has some obviously strength's on-axis due to the metallics and the color components. because of the ability of the color components to absord light... the more color components that are added the more the off-axis performance will be affected and that has more do with effecting the cone than any sheen does. the lighter versions of SF have an excellent viewing cone (no not as wide as a flat, non-gain white screen) but certainly no less than your mix or any of the other so called flatter grey mixes.

lastly i will say this, if your posts are intended to be simply argumentative then you are not helping nor effecting the change or the positive atmosphere of this thread and forum. however, if your observations are then backed up by recommendations and ways to positively make this diy a better one for everyone involved then i have no problem with that.

this diy mix is not intended to be a rigid mix controlled by me... but rather an effort extended by tiddler to be improved upon by all.

having said that, i can certainly see that both biglyle and benven would like to see the mix be a little a little flatter and less affected by sheen. so i'm asking you guys personally... how do you guys suggest we do that to improve on the mix for the diy community.

[bud16415]

The SF screen shown obviously is a very efficient screen. And efficiency is one component of gain. By efficient I mean that of the light striking it a large amount is returned back away from the screen. That is with no regard to the direction the light takes leaving the screen just that it’s leaving the screen to return to the room as apposed to being sucked up into the screen as heat energy. This screen might be said to be 95% efficient, compared to the example I showed in my experiment with the coal black screen that was maybe 2% efficient.

The metallic act like a mirror but different. In the case of a mirror the direction of the reflection is predictable because it’s all one flat surface. The metallic mirrors are totally random in the mix and make a surface we were referring to as an optical texture. This optical texture acts the same way as a low luster paint texture in scattering the light off the surface but with the added improvement of being more efficient at the same time.

Then there is the poly that binds and a side effect of this poly is a sheen to some degree. It is minimized by the addition of flattening agents etc and to some extent the sheen is desirable. It induces a cone relative gain. No one needs or wants a 180 degree viewing cone. One of the other side effects of the poly and the mixture that contains the metallic is color shifting due in part to light passing thru a clear substance at an angle and also some pigmentation in the mixes.

That’s where the colorant comes in to partly adjust the push and to also darken the mix. The darkening has to be very limited as to not obstruct all the good stuff that’s going on inside the paint. But that careful darkening allows for increased perceived darks when viewed. That last step is really the tweak that is dependent on the projector used and the light level in the viewing room.

The above is my opinion of how this screen works, and I could be wrong.

IMO a screen such as this has a very select audience both in term of setting and projector used and screen size. Just as my flat inefficient neutral gray solution has. This screen is maximizing as well as could be done to date all elements that go into a screen using off the shelf paints and craft supplies. And is ideal for the person with high skill levels that wants to put to use every lumen he has available.
As the available lumens become less important and IMO the tables tip in the direction of easier.

I know this is related but off topic and it’s the issue of painting a similar paint over a mirror surface. IMO this has still not been demonstrated here to have enough improvement in PQ IMO to be worth the cost or effort. I’m not saying it isn’t just that it hasn’t been shown to me. I’m hopeful the comparisons I have been asking for to such will show us all something.

[biglyle]

again, SF when done correctly has little to no sheen. certainly not enough to effect it's performance in any visible manner.


That just isnt possible. When roughly 60% of the mix is made up of paints that have and eggshell finish, and another 25 comes from a satin finish then the mix will pretty much be an eggshell finish. It simply has to be because of the products used. IMO, from my observations, the sheen does indeed affect the performance of this mix in many ways.

I am not trying be arguementative at all, just stating facts.

Personally, I would use a matte poly instead of the satin.
I would also keep the UPW, the SM, and the Pearl in equal amounts.

In its current form the majority of DIY'ers will have no luck at all rolling this as is, and for many spraying is simply out of the question.

[pb_maxxx]

biglyle,

your points are well taken. so then we are all pretty much in agreement that to keep sheen from having a negative effect on the mix and to flatten the mix more... we should replace the minax satin with behr's matte poly.

let's make that the first positive change.

next, i would like to consider if adding 2 ounces of upw would also help to further flatten the mix without effecting the efficiency metallics too much and in addition would make it a more rollable mix.

in addition, i'm going to take tiddler's advice and further differentiate this mix and thread by just calling it "Silver Fire".

[pb_maxxx]

"SILVER FIRE" - Dec 1st, 2006 Update

(base components)
24 oz. Delta Ceramcoat Pearl #02601
16 oz. Delta Ceramcoat Silver Metallic #02603
8 oz. Behr Interior UPW Flat #1050 (or Exterior #4050)
6 oz. Delta Pale Metallic Gold #02624

(viscosity components)
24 oz. Behr Matte Poly (water-based)
10 oz. Distilled / Tap Water

(color components)*
60 ml (2 oz) Distilled / Tap Water
60 ml (2 oz) Delta Pale Metallic Gold #02624
30 ml Delta Cardinal Red #02077
17.5 ml Windsor & Newtwon "Galleria" - Pthalo Green (PG7)
12.5 ml Delta Ultra Blue #02038

* use 3 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'

-------------------------

Silver Fire - L (Lite)**

** use 2 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'

-------------------------

Silver Fire - SL (SuperLite)***

*** use 1 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'

[benven]

lastly i will say this, if your posts are intended to be simply argumentative then you are not helping nor effecting the change or the positive atmosphere of this thread and forum. however, if your observations are then backed up by recommendations and ways to positively make this diy a better one for everyone involved then i have no problem with that.

having said that, i can certainly see that both biglyle and benven would like to see the mix be a little a little flatter and less affected by sheen. so i'm asking you guys personally... how do you guys suggest we do that to improve on the mix for the diy community.

I guess that statement was meant for me. I am not being argumentative. Merely pointing out the masses the pros and cons of these mixes. That's why there are so many solutions to this paint thing. Everyone's perception is different. I'm playing nice.

I did make the recommendation about flattening the mix. And biglyle has an excellent suggestion. And you are taking that as good advice. Satin poly is too shiny, even when mixed with other flatter components. Matte poly is an excellent start, but I am still finding a yellowish tinge to everyhting. Maybe it's just me. Try it out and see what you think. Gain will go down, cone will improve. I wouldn't add anymore white to the mix. You'll lose too much gain. I would even go so far as trying the mix without the silver, just the colour components. You'd be suprised on how dark you can get the mix without silver. Now you have to re-balance gain. If you want to boost gain, I would try a white base with a bit of gloss, no moer than eggshell. That has a pronounced effect on gain and hotspotting. Gotta be careful.

How's that for helping out.

By the way, I think bud may have hit it on the head. His explanantion makes good sense to me.

[prof55]

The metallic act like a mirror but different. In the case of a mirror the direction of the reflection is predictable because it’s all one flat surface. The metallic mirrors are totally random in the mix and make a surface we were referring to as an optical texture. This optical texture acts the same way as a low luster paint texture in scattering the light off the surface but with the added improvement of being more efficient at the same time.

Then there is the poly that binds and a side effect of this poly is a sheen to some degree. It is minimized by the addition of flattening agents etc and to some extent the sheen is desirable. It induces a cone relative gain. No one needs or wants a 180 degree viewing cone. One of the other side effects of the poly and the mixture that contains the metallic is color shifting due in part to light passing thru a clear substance at an angle and also some pigmentation in the mixes.

That’s where the colorant comes in to partly adjust the push and to also darken the mix. The darkening has to be very limited as to not obstruct all the good stuff that’s going on inside the paint. But that careful darkening allows for increased perceived darks when viewed. That last step is really the tweak that is dependent on the projector used and the light level in the viewing room.

The above is my opinion of how this screen works, and I could be wrong.

I think this is an excellent explanation of what is probably happening in this mix. It certainly makes perfect sense to me. :D

Substituting Behr Matte for Minwax Satin will most likely reduce sheen, but it may also affect overall color due to the added silicate. I'd paint a coat of each over UPW and see if the difference is noticeable.

I think the rollability problems are from the high percentage of Delta products, which I suspect use a vinyl acrylic base. It's cheaper than pure acrylic, but rather slippery.

That's my two cents worth!

Garry

[bud16415]

I read a post the other day that I can’t now find. But the poster said he added “X” amount of Flotrol per quart to his mix, (and once again I don’t remember the mix) despite several recommendations he found on here to the contrary.

He then went on to say how easy the rolling process was and how the Flowtrol slowed the drying time and leveled the mix.

I used flotrol years ago, but I don’t really remember to much about how it worked.

Anyone have any ideas on how it works with poly’s etc?

[pjohnston007]

"SILVER FIRE" - Dec 1st, 2006 Update

(base components)
24 oz. Delta Ceramcoat Pearl #02601
16 oz. Delta Ceramcoat Silver Metallic #02603
8 oz. Behr Interior UPW Flat #1050 (or Exterior #4050)
6 oz. Delta Pale Metallic Gold #02624

(viscosity components)
24 oz. Behr Matte Poly (water-based)
10 oz. Distilled / Tap Water

(color components)*
60 ml (2 oz) Distilled / Tap Water
60 ml (2 oz) Delta Pale Metallic Gold #02624
30 ml Delta Cardinal Red #02077
17.5 ml Windsor & Newtwon "Galleria" - Pthalo Green (PG7)
12.5 ml Delta Ultra Blue #02038

* use 3 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'

-------------------------

Silver Fire - L (Lite)**

** use 2 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'

-------------------------

Silver Fire - SL (SuperLite)***

*** use 1 oz. of the 'color components' and add/mix it to the 'base & viscosity components'


So...we just mix this all together and apply to our surface?

I am somewhat new to this but am trying to eek out the $2,000 performance of a VuTec SilverStar for less than $200.

How does Silver Fire compare with RS-MMMaxx?

Thank you for any direction or guidance.

[pb_maxxx]

benven,

thanks for the suggestions... i'll certainly look into them. are you finding a yellowish tinge to the mix as a whole or the behr matte poly? i agree with you about not increasing the upw... certainly not more than 1oz.

with respect the silver... that will be my next component we should take a serious look at. my current thought on that would be a little bit smaller change than you're suggesting (though i do agree thoughts . a 2:1 pearl to silver ratio appears to be the next logical step to allow the color components to be more deciding factor for increased black level detail as opposed to the silver.

tiddler,
i respect biglyle's and benven's judgement with respect getting the finish a tad bit flatter. like you, i believed it to be fairly flat already and i did not see it as presenting a visual difference but i would still like to look into the possibility that it can... especially if the cone can be further widened and off-axis viewing can be slightly increased by doing so.

i am fairly confident in replacing the minwax poly with the behr matte poly.

i'm going to look into 2 things with respect to the poly within this mix. the first will be whether the behr poly is fairly easy to roll and the second to see if just decreasing the minwax from 24oz to 20oz will help to do the trick.

--------

pjohnston007,

the base components and viscosity components are mixed together first.
the color components are mix together separately.
then add the suggested amount of the mixed color components to the first mix... depending on how silver/grey you want your screen to be.

in controlled viewing the are very much the same... the silver fire has better black levels than RSM. in ambient viewing the silver fire is a better screen. take a look at the very first page of the thread for a comparison of the two.

[biglyle]

In regards to the UPW. This stuff is loaded with Titanium dioxide, it in my opinion muddies up whites when stuff is added to it. By itself its OK, but when you use too much of it in combination with colored products, you get muddy looking whites.

I am going to try to make some samples this weekend using, some medium base flat white instead of UPW, and some deep base flat in place of the UPW. These products both can handle the addition of dark colorants much better than the white base UPW.

Also IMO, a flat surface does a better job in ambient light with dark colors than a surface with sheen. With bright colors, the opposite is true. This is why many ambient scenes that get shown off around here are of sporting events. It is much easier to watch Monday Night Football in a well lit room than it is Underworld.

As for a flat poly, I use the one delta makes.

[mynym]

That just isnt possible. When roughly 60% of the mix is made up of paints that have and eggshell finish, and another 25 comes from a satin finish then the mix will pretty much be an eggshell finish. It simply has to be because of the products used. IMO, from my observations, the sheen does indeed affect the performance of this mix in many ways.

I am not trying be arguementative at all, just stating facts.

Personally, I would use a matte poly instead of the satin.
I would also keep the UPW, the SM, and the Pearl in equal amounts.

In its current form the majority of DIY'ers will have no luck at all rolling this as is, and for many spraying is simply out of the question.


Just adding my 2 cents. I don't see much sheen on my SF screen.

[gprro1]

whats up all, anyone have an idea how SF or the other gray/silver gain mixes stack up againt something like HCCV/HCMW. I remember in the original 4805 thread there were screenshots comparing HCCV to BOC. The HCCV had both blacker blacks and brighter whites (checkerboard shot). Only complaint was HCCV had sparklies, but the HCMW didn't but was suposed to be the same, just different texture so no sparklies.

I've been using a rsmaxxx mid lumen screen (thanks pb) but I'm looking for something a little punchier now. In all fairness I may have botched my rs a little.
After the third rolled coat I was trying to fix a little sheen and roller texture. I made about half (volume wise of what i had left, without the poly) and added it to the remaining mixture. Then tried to spray with a cheap wagner and made a splatered mess. Had to reroll a couple times with the less poly mix. So I ended up with 6 layers the top 2-3 with less poly. It's a little to muted in fleshtones and whites and less "punchy" So I'm going to redo I think and get the HD hvlp sprayer probably.

[dogbolter]

Hi all,

I just painted a SF screen using the Minwax Polycrylic. I bought my supplies before 12/1 update.

While I am still waiting for the paint to dry it is apparent that I will have one noticeable roller mark. I have lots of paint left so I was wondering how best to proceed to fix this.
1) paint a new coat without sanding
2) light sand entire screen evenly and apply second coat OR
3) light sand with special attention to roller mark

Also, how long between coats is reasonable? 24hrs?

So far it looks great with my new AX100

[1Time]

pb_maxxx,

I'm surprised you didn't name it "Silver Flame".

[pb_maxxx]

1Time,

a number of people asked me to personally take this concept of rgb and give it back a true spirit of diy and to differentiate it from anything commercial. the object was to give everyone a say in the final outcome of the components within the mix. calling it silver flame would only continue to add fuel to a fire that should have died out some time ago.

over the course of the time i've been here at avs... while we don't always agree... i've come to respect the work and ideas of biglyle, crma, benven, mission, yourself, and some of the new blood around here. my hope is that we can learn to work with each or at least respect each other enough to present constructive ideas and thoughts rather than lashing out at each other.

[pb_maxxx]

dogbolter,

a very light brush sand doesn't hurt between coats.
then forget at the roller mark altogether (in other words don't pay special attention to it) and roll an even second coat in the normal fashion described by tiddler and i in the 'how to avoid roller marks thread'

if after the 2nd coat everything looks good then your welcome to stop there.

i generally go with 3 coats myself when i'm using sintra a base substrate.

[1Time]

1Time,

a number of people asked me to personally take this concept of rgb and give it back a true spirit of diy and to differentiate it from anything commercial. the object was to give everyone a say in the final outcome of the components within the mix. calling it silver flame would only continue to add fuel to a fire that should have died out some time ago.

over the course of the time i've been here at avs... while we don't always agree... i've come to respect the work and ideas of biglyle, crma, benven, mission, yourself, and some of the new blood around here. my hope is that we can learn to work with each or at least respect each other enough to present constructive ideas and thoughts rather than lashing out at each other.

I actually just meant "silver flame" sounds better (to me) than "silver fire", and so it surprised me you would not have thought so as well and named it "silver flame". However, yes I agree with your point; very thoughtful of you. Of course I have no beef with whatever things are named here so long as the commercial aspect remains absent. And thanks for the compliment; back at you. :)

[nate358]

1)So I was wondering how many square ft. the Dec. 1st mix will cover? I'm working on making a two 75in. screens, two 92in. screens, and another between 92in. and 110in.

Yeah I know a lot right? So I need to now how much that mix will cover.

2) I was planing on using acrilic mirrors, but this Sintra stuff sounds good. Where can it be found?

3) How is everyone mounting their substrates to the wall?

4) I'm planing on spraying these screens. I've found a gun on sale for $13. Do you think it'll work?

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3848/12040615281wt6.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615281wt6.jpg)

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/6129/12040615282we1.th.jpg (http://img101.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615282we1.jpg)

5) I need a compressor.... any advice on what I should look for? How much air should/does it need to hold, PSI, and so forth?

6)Can I pretty much find all the paints for SF at Home Depot and Michaels?

[gprro1]

whats up all, anyone have an idea how SF or the other gray/silver gain mixes stack up againt something like HCCV/HCMW. I remember in the original 4805 thread there were screenshots comparing HCCV to BOC. The HCCV had both blacker blacks and brighter whites (checkerboard shot).

anyone...anyone...

[nate358]

I'd also like to add one more question to the above questions..... now that it's winter time.... does the cold change the way the paint drys? I would only be able to paint out in the garage, which could be warmed by a heater during application, but not for the whole drying time when I sleep. Should I just wait till the weather warms up?

[MississippiMan]

I'd also like to add one more question to the above questions..... now that it's winter time.... does the cold change the way the paint drys? I would only be able to paint out in the garage, which could be warmed by a heater during application, but not for the whole drying time when I sleep. Should I just wait till the weather warms up?


That question comes around occasionally, and always in the Winter it seems.

What pains me to see posted is suggestions that waiting until the Spring Thaw to paint seems the only solution. :(

If you heat your workspace up to at least 70-80 degrees, (...long enough to be sure the substrate is "room tempurture) and paint a normally thick (...that means thin....) coating, leaving the heater on for just 1 hour, and then applying a fan on low will get the surface dry enough to let you continue. Unless your living in Point Barrow, AK, and the interior walls of the garage have Hoarfrost on them. :D

I use heat and air even when it's reasonably warm (60 degrees) because I can then re-paint in under 1 hour. If your just trying to get a dried surface overnight, doing as I suggest will accomplish that.

[brianbes]

Haven't been in here for a while good to see you guys still at it. I did with the help of others the Rs-lite mixture for my Z2 and I will tell you it was a huge improvement. Looking at the new Mit 1000 as the Z2 is almost out of bulb life and the mits is very bright. I have some daytime light but windows are covered so no problem. The mit is bright and I like to have some light on when watching so which of these new mixes would be best for the Mits. By the way I think the Rs mix actually looks better with background light at night.

[BoomerBrian]

1)So I was wondering how many square ft. the Dec. 1st mix will cover? I'm working on making a two 75in. screens, two 92in. screens, and another between 92in. and 110in.

Yeah I know a lot right? So I need to now how much that mix will cover.

2) I was planing on using acrilic mirrors, but this Sintra stuff sounds good. Where can it be found?

3) How is everyone mounting their substrates to the wall?

4) I'm planing on spraying these screens. I've found a gun on sale for $13. Do you think it'll work?

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3848/12040615281wt6.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615281wt6.jpg)

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/6129/12040615282we1.th.jpg (http://img101.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615282we1.jpg)

5) I need a compressor.... any advice on what I should look for? How much air should/does it need to hold, PSI, and so forth?

6)Can I pretty much find all the paints for SF at Home Depot and Michaels?


I think that is the gun I have. It works fine for me.

[MississippiMan]

1)So I was wondering how many square ft. the Dec. 1st mix will cover? I'm working on making a two 75in. screens, two 92in. screens, and another between 92in. and 110in.

Yeah I know a lot right? So I need to now how much that mix will cover.

You can do the two 'Bigguns' or two 'Littlins', or one of each, but you need to double the mix to do 5 fur shur.

uch de2) I was planing on using acryilic mirrors, but this Sintra stuff sounds good. Where can it be found?

At any Plastic Supply. But depending on your application, and a desire to strive for something special, I'd consider using the Acrylic Mirror for the larger screen/s.

3) How is everyone mounting their substrates to the wall?

I use Elastomeric Adhesive Caulk (White Lighting @ Home Depot) It doesn't dry too fast and is very spreadable with a Square toothed trowel. You can either attach the screen directly to a wall, or to a 4' x 8' Board with the 92" and under sizes. The bigger 110"er would need a backer Board made up as a "two layer" composite of cut sheets of 1/4" Tempered hardboard. With all such "Backer Boards", centering the substrate of choice 2" inside the outside perimeter of the "BB" allows for a perfect space to attach the substrate to a wall with screws, then cover those screws with stips of the trim of choice.

4) I'm planing on spraying these screens. I've found a gun on sale for $13. Do you think it'll work?

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3848/12040615281wt6.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615281wt6.jpg)

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/6129/12040615282we1.th.jpg (http://img101.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12040615282we1.jpg)

Much depends on the Needle size it comes with (...you want a 1.4 to 1.5 mm Needle/Nozzle size.) and how many air holes around the center oriface the nozzle has, as well as the array of air holes on the "Side Atomizer Arms" that protrude out from the nozzle. Many "Cheepies' only have a limited amount of such. Take a close up of the end of the nozzle and I'll be able to judge far better.

5) I need a compressor.... any advice on what I should look for? How much air should/does it need to hold, PSI, and so forth?

Home Depot has a 25 Gallon Job for $299 that comes with a complete Air Tool Kit. They have a smaller 17 gallon one for $199.00 that will keep up with a 110" size job, but you have to pace yourself to avoid having the air supply dwindle to the point you no longer applying paint with a consistant pressure.

6)Can I pretty much find all the paints for SF at Home Depot and Michaels?

Yep.

[nate358]

Thank you, I'll take a picture of the Gun later today to show you.

I'm thinking of a less permanent solution to mount the screen... I'll probably use some sort of french cleat method. I guess I was thinking on how to put a velvet border around acrilic or on it.

[MississippiMan]

If using acrylic, you need to back that material with something that can accept the French Cleat. As long as you stay with using a 92" screen or less, a standard 4' x 8' piece of 1/4" Tempered Brown Hardboard cut to 2" larger than your screen material's perimeter will work great. You have then a 2" surrounding boarder to which you can attach the Trim of your choice. (...Well, you'll have 1.5" at the top and bottom anyway. Plenty enough to work with.

45" x 80" = 92' diagonal Cut board to 84" x 48"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Business%20Photos%20to%20send/Backerboardillustration.jpg

Lastly, affixing 1/2 of your French Cleat to the top "backside" edge of the Brown Board both stiffens up the board as well as allows you to screw through the hardboard into the French Cleat. Just be sure to slightly drill out a "Countersink" depression to let the screw head go flush. Just hand pick a good straight piece of 1" x 8" and rip it in half at an even 45 degree angle. Get a 8' er and you'll have enough left over to use as spacer blocking along the bottom backside edge to prevent the bottom of the board from falling inward against the wall.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Business%20Photos%20to%20send/FrenchCleatScreenHangingmethod-simp.jpg


(ignore the front cleat....that was for a "Flip" application. )

If you go on to make a 110"er, you have to use an assembly consisting of a composite of Brown Hardboard.

[nate358]

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8848/12110611411tz1.th.jpg (http://img374.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12110611411tz1.jpg)

Here is a compressor I've found for $100 it's 2hp 8gal tank. Could this work?

I went and checked out the gun again.....

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/3421/12110611551oq5.th.jpg (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12110611551oq5.jpg)

It's a bad pic, but all I had was my cell phone. It seems there are 6 holes on the 1.4 tip. Are these what you were talking about?

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2302/12110611561zq5.th.jpg (http://img374.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12110611561zq5.jpg)

Another bad pic... here is the side of it.

[mynym]

I second MMan's recommendation on French cleats. If they are strong enough to support 400lb kitchen cabinets, a 80lb screen is cake work.

In my case I used dual French cleats, top and bottom. The biggest challenge with the dual lateral French cleats was aligning them perfectly between what was reflected on the back of the screen to the wall. I wouldn't attempt dual cleats without a laser level. In retrospect I should have done it the way MMan explained it above.

Below are some pics of my Silver Fire screen mounted with the French Cleat method.

Dual French Cleats On Back of screen:
http://www.derekreynolds.com/gallery/albums/BlackFlameWallAssembly/IMG_0206.jpg


Dual French Cleats On Wall
http://www.derekreynolds.com/gallery/albums/BlackFlameWallAssembly/IMG_0214.jpg


SilverFire Screen mounted on French Cleats
http://www.derekreynolds.com/gallery/albums/FinishedBlackFlame/IMG_0232.jpg


SilverFire Completely mounted
http://www.derekreynolds.com/gallery/albums/FinishedBlackFlame/IMG_0230.jpg

[MississippiMan]

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8848/12110611411tz1.th.jpg (http://img374.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12110611411tz1.jpg)

Here is a compressor I've found for $100 it's 2hp 8gal tank. Could this work?

Barely. At a 30 psi setting on the Gun (...I use 40 psi) you'll empty that little tank in a hurry. The deciding factor is how many CFM "intake" your air pump can deliver. All you can do is test it by charging up the tank, hooking up the Gun (set at 30-40 psi) and squeezing the trigger. Time the space before the pump kick in, then the time it takes the Gun's regulator Pressure dial to fall bekow you Gun's pressure setting.

I went and checked out the gun again.....


It's a bad pic, but all I had was my cell phone. It seems there are 6 holes on the 1.4 tip. Are these what you were talking about?


Another bad pic... here is the side of it.

I'm familiar. I have the carcass of one, sans the needle, Fluid spring & Knob, and Needle Orifice Nozzle. My example spit and sputtered from day one, so I scavenged parts off it (...it was after all, pretty cheap) because they also fit on my Ingersoll Rand.

But others have had better experiences, so when your ready to squirt, we'll review your Mix choice, how thin it should be, how the Gun acts at the applicable pressure and feed settings, and most importantly of all, how much of and how long pressure is adequately supplied.

[nate358]

I'm familiar. I have the carcass of one, sans the needle, Fluid spring & Knob, and Needle Orifice Nozzle. My example spit and sputtered from day one, so I scavenged parts off it (...it was after all, pretty cheap) because they also fit on my Ingersoll Rand.


You'll have to forgive me cause I don't really know the names of the part of the gun. I've done some spray painting in Aviation Maintenance school, but it might as well not even count. I don't really understand what you're saying up there.

From what I understand... that $13 gun isn't going to do it. If you could post a picture of what a good gun looks like or the kinds of things I should be looking for would be great!

One other thing.... should the gun be a gravity fed gun or should it just be a HVLP gun? Thanks

[Wet1]

Isn't Silver Fire basically the same as Black Flame?

[mech]

Isn't Silver Fire basically the same as Black Flame?
Ahhhh... maybe if I read a title once in awhile! :eek: Gonna delete that post. :o

I thought Silver Fire was a new pb_maxx mix.

mech

[biglyle]

Do we need these same photos in every thread? The ones showing the french cleat are understandable, the other 2 serve no purpose what so ever in this thread.

[MississippiMan]

You'll have to forgive me cause I don't really know the names of the part of the gun. I've done some spray painting in Aviation Maintenance school, but it might as well not even count. I don't really understand what you're saying up there.

If you bought the Gun, it has a parts Blow-up and instructions.

From what I understand... that $13 gun isn't going to do it. If you could post a picture of what a good gun looks like or the kinds of things I should be looking for would be great!

Oh Bother! ;) Ok...it took a little doing to whip up at 3:00 am, ya know. :p

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/MississippiMan/Business%20Photos%20to%20send/HVLPGravityGunDetail.jpg


Additional Notes:
*Some Guns have the "Pattern Control" knob on the Top rear of the Gun. Others stick the "Pressure control Knob there.

* Pay attention to the appearence of the Nozzle cap. It should be robust and look exactly as pictured or you'll have issues finding any replacement parts.

* Use a 1.4 to 1.5 mm needle/Nozzle assembly

One other thing.... should the gun be a gravity fed gun or should it just be a HVLP gun? Thanks

Gravity fed is the best for a beginner on a budget. Siphon fed HVLP Guns need all the more consistent pressure because they must suck up the paint via air going past a pick up orifice. (...most car painters use these...) Pressure feed Guns fill a canister with pressure and push it out. A Gravity Feed uses....well, gravity to let the paint fall down into the Fluid chamber where when the trigger is pressed, it flows out into a concentrated blast of air at the nozzle's end where it is atomized.


The best HVLP Gun in the World won't compensate for a lack of spraying technique or proper paint preparation (thinning). Once you get the paint of choice ready, use a practice piece of something to make the Gun's various adjustments, and to get used to the amount of paint being delivered, how fast you must go and at what distance from the surface must be maintained.

Go ahead and try the Gun you have first if you want. Most Gun's as pictured above will run between $50.00 to $100.00 Some however are under $40.00 You can PM me for Spraying Videos, and/or to get a Phone Number to call when your setting up your Gun and starting to practice and I'll be glad to help walk you through it. But ya gotta post back about your effort so others can benefit as well.

Do we need these same photos in every thread? The ones showing the french cleat are understandable, the other 2 serve no purpose what so ever in this thread.

Yes they do. They show a working example of the DIY Mix referred in this thread as Silver Fire, the alter-ego of Black Flame, and how the maker of such accomplished hanging his screen using French Cleats, and what it looked like complete and hung in place, and as such are entirely relevant.

C'mon BL, I've posted those diagram examples of French Cleats elsewhere before as well, but linking back to those photos is a PITA as far as locating them again. MYNYM made a specific contribution to this Thread's content. Can we not accept it as that ?

[biglyle]

"Yes they do. They show a working example of the DIY Mix referred in this thread as Silver Fire, the alter-ego of Black Flame, and how the maker of such accomplished hanging his screen using French Cleats, and what it looked like complete and hung in place, and as such are entirely relevant."

Those picture are of a mix that is differant than the one posted in this thread. PB himself said the mix has changed. These photos are also available in at least 3 other threads.
The french cleats are fine, the other photos are irrelevant.

[nate358]

MississippiMan thanks for all your work thus far.... That really helps me out! I haven't bought a gun yet, so now I know what to look for. I look forward to talking to you for further assistance.

[pb_maxxx]

havin' a little fun with a silver fire rear projection screen...

using a milky white translucent substrate similiar to #2067... i rolled (yes rolled) 3 light coats of silver fire using double the current amount of minwax & water.

many have and will continue to doubt whether light fusion can enhance the brightness of an image...
...if you are asking me, i would say that the potential is very real... but in my opinion, it's effectiveness and it's efficiency may not be best utilized in the current form of an acrylic mirror.

much has been speculated as to whether or not there was even an image left over to be reflected... with 3 lightly sprayed coats... let alone 3 rolled coats as i have done here.

certainly there is enough of an image left to make a viable rear projection screen.

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/SF_rear1.jpg

http://xtreme-fusion-screens.com/misc/SF_rear2.jpg

[prof55]

Fascinating!

Are you projecting onto the unpainted side?

Have you tried it both ways?

[pb_maxxx]

here i'm projecting on the painted side (the side i prefered). the unpainted side is the viewing side.
(which means you are seening the image after it has penetrated both the topcoat and an 1/8" of a semi-translucent white acrylic.

i definitely learned or re-affirmed some techniques i'll soon be incorporating in some future screen designs.

now if i was looking at doing a future rear projection screen... i'd make 2 changes here. the first would be to reduce/remove the metallics... simply because the mica flakes themselves are essentially opaque... which is a detriment when it comes rear projection.

the second would be the substrate itself. while i'm not sure whether i'd go as transparent as say... a clear polycarbonate... i'd certainly use a more transparent rigid substrate such as #2067... instead of the generic semi-transparent white one that i used here to simulate a #2067.

[nate358]

(color components)*
60 ml (2 oz) Distilled / Tap Water
60 ml (2 oz) Delta Pale Metallic Gold #02624
30 ml Delta Cardinal Red #02077
17.5 ml Windsor & Newtwon "Galleria" - Pthalo Green (PG7)
12.5 ml Delta Ultra Blue #02038

So once you mix the color components up... then you mix 1, 2, or 3 ounces into the rest of the mix. If I were doing a super lite mix... wouldn't I have enough color components to do at least 4 batches? Or for that matter make a batch for each one (regular, lite, and superlite)?

[steve68]

According to Delta's website Pthalo Green has been discontinued. I found the Winsor & Newton at Hobby Lobby in a 6.75 oz tube for $5.99 but if you watch their website you can usually find a 40% off any single item coupon.

Steve

[nate358]

So I've been pricing substrates... It seems the best Prices I could find were for:
Sintra: 3mm thick, 4x8 sheet $32 @ a local plastic company
Acrylic Mirror: 1/8th thick, 4x8 sheet for $121 @ the same place where the Sintra is from /
and a 1/16 thick, 4x8 sheet for $104 @ Home Depot
Wilsonart DW: 4x8 sheet for $52.32 and a 5x8 sheet for $65.40

Do these seem like good prices? I was thinking the Sintra would be cheaper.... I only checked at plastic suppliers because I don't know where else to look.
When I called Home Depot and asked about the Wilsonart... I was told that they didn't have any of the DW in stock now, but that it would be $35-$40 if it was. It has been my understanding that Wisonart should cost more than Sintra, but they seem to be the same price to me. If anyone has some advice as to where I should look for Sintra or if it is known for some other name.... please let me know. Also... If an acrylic mirror were going to be used... MM, which thickness should be used 1/8th or 1/16th? Thanks

[pb_maxxx]

nate,
yes, you could use 'color components' on another batch... rather than making a new batch of 'color components'.

with respect the substrate pricing... only the acrylic mirror prices you quoted seem a bit out of line... they are both about $25 higher than i'm familiar with.

the closer you can get to 1st surface mirror the better... so go with the 1/16" if you have a solid backing or frame to put it on.

steve,
michaels also runs weekly 40% off of a single item regular priced item as well.
michael sells the 2oz tubes for $2.99 at regular price.

tiddler,
it's hard for me to buy a quart of behr matte poly for $18. (after tax) when i get what i use for $30 a gallon. that's more than a quart of baby formula. ;)

[nate358]

nate,
with respect the substrate pricing... only the acrylic mirror prices you quoted seem a bit out of line... they are both about $25 higher than i'm familiar with.

the closer you can get to 1st surface mirror the better... so go with the 1/16" if you have a solid backing or frame to put it on.

tiddler,
it's hard for me to buy a quart of behr matte poly for $18. (after tax) when i get what i use for $30 a gallon. that's more than a quart of baby formula. ;)

Can I ask where you normally look for the Acrylic mirrors?

I just bought a quart of the behr matte poly for this mix.... was I supposed to buy something different? I was hoping it came in a gallon, but alas it doesn't. I was thinking I'd get a whole gallon for $18. Is there something else we could use?

[nate358]

I thought that the formula was changed to Behr Matte Poly instead of the Minwax Satin Polycrylic?

If so, has anyone tried the Behr Matte Poly in a metallic mix?

I had tried using the Behr Matte Poly and had problems but I was only adding very small amounts of the Folkart Metallic White Pearl to it as a top coat. Im just wondering if anyone has tried it in the proportions your mix calls for.

um... I guess that's "going" to make me the first.

[pb_maxxx]

nate,
i would not be too concerned... as the behr matte poly appears to be a quality product. i personally have used 4 different water based polys known for there good quality without much reservation and they all did the job they were intended to do.

tiddler,
i understand now why you had a question about using the behr poly in the mix. i've done exactly as you detailed and yes, using 5-20% base and 80-95% poly results in a mix that extremely hard (nearly impossible) to roll even with the minwax. while you have certainly shown that rolling a 100% poly as a topcoat is easily achievable... any mix that uses 75% or more poly should be SPRAYED for best results.

[nate358]

tiddler,
i understand now why you had a question about using the behr poly in the mix. i've done exactly as you detailed and yes, using 5-20% base and 80-95% poly results in a mix that extremely hard (nearly impossible) to roll even with the minwax. while you have certainly shown that rolling a 100% poly as a topcoat is easily achievable... any mix that uses 75% or more poly should be rolled for best results.

Um.... Silver Fire can be sprayed, right? I mean, that's what I've been talking about this whole time.

[pb_maxxx]

nate358,
absolutely. and spraying is the preferred method. however, i'm also aware that 9 out 10 people will likely look to roll it... which i why i make sure to cover that base of folks as well.

if you look at the end of mm's S-I-L-V-E-R thread... due to the introduction of ambient light from a pool table area... he chose to switch to silver fire. i can tell you that mm chose to use behr's matte poly in that particular mix. he reported no ill effects from using behr instead of minwax... and i suspect that neither will you.

[pb_maxxx]

you are correct, i'll edit my earlier post... thanx.

[nate358]

Ok so after haveing a hard time looking for acrylic mirrors.... I was thinking. What if we used Mylar instead!

These are by no means the cheapest that can be found that I know of (just did a quick search)

Mylar sheets (http://www.hydroponics.net/c/54)

even thicker Mylar can be found Here (http://www.rplastics.com/mylar.html)

This stuff could either be taped/glued to a frame (if it can be streched some) or Taped/glued to sintra or some other light wieght board.

The only thing I don't know is if this stuff can be painted on.

Let me know you all think!

[1Time]

Ok so after haveing a hard time looking for acrylic mirrors.... I was thinking. What if we used Mylar instead!

These are by no means the cheapest that can be found that I know of (just did a quick search)

Mylar sheets (http://www.hydroponics.net/c/54)

even thicker Mylar can be found Here (http://www.rplastics.com/mylar.html)

This stuff could either be taped/glued to a frame (if it can be streched some) or Taped/glued to sintra or some other light wieght board.

The only thing I don't know is if this stuff can be painted on.

Let me know you all think!


Mylar can be painted quite easily. Search "mylar" for my resent post regarding this. The paint mix just needs to be transluscent enough.

[nate358]

I've even found it to be 55 in. wide and 4 mil thick. This stuff has got to be able to work!

[nate358]

Mylar can be painted quite easily. Search "mylar" for my resent post regarding this. The paint mix just needs to be transluscent enough.

I think the above pictures show that this is even after 3 coats!

check this website out.... here (http://www.discount-hydro.com/mylar.asp)



Black & White Poly

Black & White poly is a plastic that is black on one side and white on the other. It can be used to cover up windows, make partitions and reflect light onto the plants. It is great for partitioning off spaces, as it is very tough, reflective, and can be handled on a daily basis without damage or tearing. The white side reflects 90% of all light. It is 6 mil thick and is 10 feet wide. It is sold either by the 100' roll, or by the foot.


And what about this stuff....

Ultreflect

With its specially designed grid patter