The Official Silver Fire V.2 Thread. - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 1587 Old 04-26-2011, 06:06 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Hey ERuiz,

Your not taking into account the ability to attenuate the PJ's light output via the Menu's Brightness Control.

You don't want to permanently attenuate the amount of reflective light off the screen by going too dark. If that was the goal, I'd be suggesting SF v2 5.0 or 6.0, however...with a big 'ol 125" diagonal 2.39:1 Screen, that's exactly not what you want to do.

Realize that when you zoom out to fill the confines of the 2.39:1 Screen you will not only lose brightness due to the zooming /size that results, you also lose a full 30% of your reflective area...the part of the Projected image at top & bottom that is masked.

This is not a case where the brightness of the PJ's bulb output is refocused via a Anamorphic Lens down from a 16:9 area into a 2.39:1 area. And even that is something that only happens when 16:9 is converted to 2.39:1 via such a Lens.

Remember that Art's settings were matched to not a High Gain / High Contrast Gray, but to something more akin to a Matte White.

You stick to using a 3.0 at the darkest, then Calibrate the Screen based on what you have...not what someone else uses. The SF v2 3.0 will really help the 8350's overall appearance of having even better Contrast, even though and especially because the Iris is not employed, and it will also deliver all the "PoP" you'll desire. Just adjust your PJ to suit the Screen and you'll be fine.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 1587 Old 04-26-2011, 06:15 AM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Hey ERuiz,

Your not taking into account the ability to attenuate the PJ's light output via the Menu's Brightness Control.

You don't want to permanently attenuate the amount of reflective light off the screen by going too dark. If that was the goal, I'd be suggesting SF v2 5.0 or 6.0, however...with a big 'ol 125" diagonal 2.39:1 Screen, that's exactly not what you want to do.

Realize that when you zoom out to fill the confines of the 2.39:1 Screen you will not only lose brightness due to the zooming /size that results, you also lose a full 30% of your reflective area...the part of the Projected image at top & bottom that is masked.

This is not a case where the brightness of the PJ's bulb output is refocused via a Anamorphic Lens down from a 16:9 area into a 2.39:1 area. And even that is something that only happens when 16:9 is converted to 2.39:1 via such a Lens.

Remember that Art's settings were matched to not a High Gain / High Contrast Gray, but to something more akin to a Matte White.

You stick to using a 3.0 at the darkest, then Calibrate the Screen based on what you have...not what someone else uses. The SF v2 3.0 will really help the 8350's overall appearance of having even better Contrast, even though and especially because the Iris is not employed, and it will also deliver all the "PoP" you'll desire. Just adjust your PJ to suit the Screen and you'll be fine.

As always, MM, thanks for your explanation! So I guess I will go with SF v2 3.0... =)
ERuiz is offline  
post #273 of 1587 Old 04-26-2011, 11:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
reduce fL's... hmmmmm.... i think you might have lost on that one.

personally, i'd rather you be working with double the fL's (at 38+ fL's than to be working from just 16fL's.

the darker the color of the screen.... combined with the brighter the fL's... makes it the easier to effectively create real black levels and contrast as opposed to relying solely on perceived contrast.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #274 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 05:39 AM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

reduce fL's... hmmmmm.... i think you might have lost on that one.

personally, i'd rather you be working with double the fL's (at 38+ fL's than to be working from just 16fL's.

the darker the color of the screen.... combined with the brighter the fL's... makes it the easier to effectively create real black levels and contrast as opposed to relying solely on perceived contrast.

Hmmmm let me get this straight... are you suggesting I rather run the 8350 on dynamic mode with normal lamp and use perhaps SF v2 4.0 or 4.5????

Now Im confused... :-(

I thought for watching movies in a bat cave, 12-16fl was the ideal choice?
ERuiz is offline  
post #275 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 11:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
no, run it in eco if possible. i wasn't trying to confuse you... just that i believe in the more fL's = better philosphy.

with respect the bave cave statement... actually 12-14 would be considered more towards the low end for controlled viewing... with 15-16 being more ideal. and in my honest opinion 18-20 would be even more ideal than 15-16.

i was simply stating that if the contrast ratio can be sustained for high lumens without light leakage then i'd rather have more fL's to work with than less... bat cave or not.

my rule of thumb for silver fire v2 3.0 however... is definitely 20+ fL's.... and preferably closer to 25.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #276 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 11:58 AM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

my rule of thumb for silver fire v2 3.0 however... is definitely 20+ fL's.... and preferably closer to 25.

Is this while projecting on a SF v2 3.0 screen or 20+ FLs on a reference white matte 1.0 gain screen to begin with before going with SF v2 3.0? Oh, and how much gain would SF v2 3.0 run at? .8?
ERuiz is offline  
post #277 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 01:19 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

Is this while projecting on a SF v2 3.0 screen or 20+ FLs on a reference white matte 1.0 gain screen to begin with before going with SF v2 3.0? Oh, and how much gain would SF v2 3.0 run at? .8?

Crazy. SF v2 3.0 will be about 1.2 gain.

There is no SF v2 formula that would ever be .8

BTW, "Foot Lambert" is a measurement of how much brightness is reflected "off the Screen". Lumens are "...what comes out of the PJ's Lens".

I thought this was settled. Run you PJ on low lamp mode...no Iris...and calibrate to 6500 k based on the Screen's color.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #278 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 01:25 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post


Crazy. SF v2 3.0 will be about 1.2 gain.

There is no SF v2 formula that would ever be .8

BTW, "Foot Lambert" is a measurement of how much brightness is reflected "off the Screen". Lumens are "...what comes out of the PJ's Lens".

I thought this was settled. Run you PJ on low lamp mode...no Iris...and calibrate to 6500 k based on the Screen's color.

Hey MM, this is driving me nuts. :-( Ive got a headache from thinking thinking thinking. I really need to get this right this time around.

So let me get this right, MM. If I go with SF v2 3.0, it will have a gain of 1.2 even though its gray in color? It will still battle ambient light yet providing a boost in gain?
ERuiz is offline  
post #279 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 01:36 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

Hey MM, this is driving me nuts. :-( Ive got a headache from thinking thinking thinking. I really need to get this right this time around.

So let me get this right, MM. If I go with SF v2 3.0, it will have a gain of 1.2 even though its gray in color? It will still battle ambient light yet providing a boost in gain?


To quote my Buddy Rango, "Dat's whad-I-sed!"

That's what makes SF formulas so special. They are Gray. They combat Ambient light. The don't gobble up projected Lumens.

Ergo...you can run in Eco mode in a Bat Cave and still have "PoP", or Normal Mode in Ambient light and still enjoy great contrast and dynamic colors.

Who'd of ever thunk it....?

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #280 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 01:40 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post


To quote my Buddy Rango, "Dat's whad-I-sed!"

That's what makes SF formulas so special. They are Gray. They combat Ambient light. The don't gobble up projected Lumens.

Ergo...you can run in Eco mode in a Bat Cave and still have "PoP", or Normal Mode in Ambient light and still enjoy great contrast and dynamic colors.

Who'd of ever thunk it....?

OMG, now it makes sense! Lol So which SF v2 would yield a gain of 1.0?
ERuiz is offline  
post #281 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 02:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

OMG, now it makes sense! Lol So which SF v2 would yield a gain of 1.0?

something in the SF v2 4.0 / 5.0

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #282 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 02:30 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post


something in the SF v2 4.0 / 5.0

And 4.0-5.0 would be used under which conditions? When would you recommend this for an Epson 8350 user?
ERuiz is offline  
post #283 of 1587 Old 04-27-2011, 06:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
4.0-5.0 should be used if have a varying degree of controlled viewing in the evening coupled with uncontrolled ambient light during the daylight and/or if you simply like to have some lights most of time during your viewing. the other reason is if you are partial to deeper black levels without losing black level detail.

again the available fL's is key... and for SF V2 4.0+... i'd recommend at least 30fL's.

i think that in normal mode... the 8350 can handle a SF 4.0 with no problem.

i've successfully been able to do a SF V2 7.0 with approx 20fL's in econ mode with my crappy pj.

(far left - white N9.5, center SF V2 7.0, far right SF V2 3.5)... screenshot was taken 30 degrees off-axis.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #284 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 11:02 AM
Member
 
Hank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
MMan, this made me think of one more tweak to your first post. You added, at my suggestion, the V2 # versus ounces of colorant relationship. How about adding a third column in chart form:
Version 2 #.....Ounces of Colorant.....Screen Gain.....here's the example of 3.0:
......3.0.....................3.0........................1.3

Whaddya think?
Hank is offline  
post #285 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 11:23 AM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

4.0-5.0 should be used if have a varying degree of controlled viewing in the evening coupled with uncontrolled ambient light during the daylight and/or if you simply like to have some lights most of time during your viewing. the other reason is if you are partial to deeper black levels without losing black level detail.

again the available fL's is key... and for SF V2 4.0+... i'd recommend at least 30fL's.

i think that in normal mode... the 8350 can handle a SF 4.0 with no problem.

i've successfully been able to do a SF V2 7.0 with approx 20fL's in econ mode with my crappy pj.

(far left - white N9.5, center SF V2 7.0, far right SF V2 3.5)... screenshot was taken 30 degrees off-axis.

Where on the screenshot does the right section begins? I can't see much of a difference between the center and right side. BTW, the difference is huge between the left and the rest of the image!

I am heavily leaning towards going with SF v2 4.0 for my Epson 8350 in Cinema, ECO lamp mode and auto iris OFF. According to the pro calc, this would yield around 19fl for my screen size and screen gain of 1.2 more or less.
ERuiz is offline  
post #286 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 01:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
the 7.0 and 3.5 come together and split at the longest braide.
this is a screenshot to show the separation between the two. sometiimes it's hard to catch in a screenshot what the difference is when a movie is in motion. but i'm about 50/50 torn between the two as to specific scenes i like more on one or the other. so i'll probably settle somewhere in the 5-5.5 range myself...

the 7.0 obviously kicks the 3.5's butt when i turn on all the lights though.

i can see you'd like to go with the 4.0... so i'm going to recommend this should you do decide to go that direction.

start with the SF V2 HG components... with the exception of using 4oz of the colorant.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #287 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 02:50 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

...the 1st update to SF V.2 is as follows....

the liquitex gold metallic within the SF V.2 base will be added on a graduated scale.
after make a determination of which SF V.2 screen you decide to make...

SF v.2 1.0 will use 1.0oz of liquitex gold metallic
SF v.2 2.0 will use 1.5oz of liquitex gold metallic
SF v.2 3.0 will use 2oz of liquitex gold metallic
SF v.2 4.0 will use 2.5 oz of liquitex gold metallic
SF v.2 5.0 will use 3.0oz of liquitex gold metallic
...etc.

so beginning with SF v.2 1.0... 1oz of liquitex gold metallic is used, and for every version after... an additional 1/2 of liquitex gold is added.

.......................

hopefully this will not be too hard to folks to follow..
however, i do promise that doing so will indeed improve upon the already stellar white levels of SF v.2

Is this still applicable? If yes, could this be added to the OP?
ERuiz is offline  
post #288 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 04:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
yes it is. you'll have to kick MM in the butt though... as i can't get to it to update it. apparantly MM has been busy working at other things...
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #289 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 04:11 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

you'll have to kick MM in the butt though...

LOL Don't worry, I will handle it!
ERuiz is offline  
post #290 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 04:44 PM
Member
 
FUN4ME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 89
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

the 7.0 and 3.5 come together and split at the longest braide.
this is a screenshot to show the separation between the two. sometiimes it's hard to catch in a screenshot what the difference is when a movie is in motion. but i'm about 50/50 torn between the two as to specific scenes i like more on one or the other. so i'll probably settle somewhere in the 5-5.5 range myself...

the 7.0 obviously kicks the 3.5's butt when i turn on all the lights though.

i can see you'd like to go with the 4.0... so i'm going to recommend this should you do decide to go that direction.

start with the SF V2 HG components... with the exception of using 4oz of the colorant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

Is this still applicable? If yes, could this be added to the OP?

I like where this is going, I think I will be doing the same, I do have a question about the gold, how much should be added if I go with SF HG and 4.0 color component?

room
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


subs and riser
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
FUN4ME is offline  
post #291 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 04:56 PM
Member
 
FUN4ME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 89
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Another question, I see that MATT is no longer called out so I am assuming this is the right liquitex basics line
http://www.dickblick.com/products/li...ics-8-oz-jars/
If not could you put up a link to the right one?
Thanks
Erich

room
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


subs and riser
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
FUN4ME is offline  
post #292 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 05:25 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by FUN4ME View Post

I like where this is going, I think I will be doing the same, I do have a question about the gold, how much should be added if I go with SF HG and 4.0 color component?

You would go with 2.5 of Gold
ERuiz is offline  
post #293 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 05:27 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
EXTREMELY OFF TOPIC but what the heck... When you have a border made out of black velvet, the image will not appear whatsoever? I ask because my image's wall is painted matte black and while messing around with the zoom, a large part of the image was projected on the black wall and it was clearly visible. Image spill on black velvet will not appear as it does on matte black paint?
ERuiz is offline  
post #294 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 06:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
for nearly 3 years... i fought every battle known to man to keep from having to 'afford' the $30 of black velvet for own HT. whether is was flat black paint, or black cloth... etc, etc... i tried not to give in. i finally gave in, but only because i was installing a HT for someone else and i wasn't about to have my work frowned upon.

so to make a long story short... my felt like a dunce for not 'believing' sooner. it makes a world of difference.

----

as for the gold... yes, follow the same game plan as the normal V2

----

guys, because you are using the V2 HG but with 4oz of colorant... because of the increased silver... it is imperative that you spray your screen in dusters...

if you are using sintra or thrifty white.... give the first duster about 30 minutes to dry/adhere. after that, you'll only need to wait 15-20 minutes between dusters.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #295 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 06:33 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

for nearly 3 years... i fought every battle known to man to keep from having to 'afford' the $30 of black velvet for own HT. whether is was flat black paint, or black cloth... etc, etc... i tried not to give in. i finally gave in, but only because i was installing a HT for someone else and i wasn't about to have my work frowned upon.

so to make a long story short... my felt like a dunce for not 'believing' sooner. it makes a world of difference.

----

as for the gold... yes, follow the same game plan as the normal V2

----

guys, because you are using the V2 HG but with 4oz of colorant... because of the increased silver... it is imperative that you spray your screen in dusters...

if you are using sintra or thrifty white.... give the first duster about 30 minutes to dry/adhere. after that, you'll only need to wait 15-20 minutes between dusters.

Link for a decent size of velvet at a poor man's salary? :-P
ERuiz is offline  
post #296 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 06:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
hint:

go to hobby lobby's website and print off a 40% coupon... they usually have black velvet in the fabric section for 12.99 a yard... that'll make it about 7.99 a yard... and viola, you have a poor man's black velvet
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #297 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 06:54 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

hint:

go to hobby lobby's website and print off a 40% coupon... they usually have black velvet in the fabric section for 12.99 a yard... that'll make it about 7.99 a yard... and viola, you have a poor man's black velvet

Would this be it?

http://shop.hobbylobby.com/products/...velvet-fabric/
ERuiz is offline  
post #298 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 07:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
yes it 'tis
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #299 of 1587 Old 04-28-2011, 08:34 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb_maxxx View Post

yes it 'tis

Sweet, thx!
ERuiz is offline  
post #300 of 1587 Old 04-29-2011, 12:55 PM
Senior Member
 
ERuiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Time for some SF mixing!!! :-)
LL
ERuiz is offline  
Reply DIY Screen Section

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off