Silver Fire 4.0 with pt-ar100u (previously: need some help picking a screen paint for my new projector) - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 87 Old 05-08-2012, 11:38 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

interesting, so the final result may differ for example, when adding lets say X oz. of some NG, vs adding 2X of a 'half as dark' NG.

is that the reason the SF colorant is so dark, so you can add less of it as a percent of the reflective elements? i.e. less 'dark color' is potentially better than 'more light color' tinting?

Yes. Reflectivity maintained relates to gain at whatever level/shade of Gray.

Quote:


didnt think about the gold, thats a good point - though the gold would add in some more reflective components. assuming this is not a huge issue..?

Actually, the use of a metallic is designed to maintain reflectivity while adding an additional primary to correct a push. No metallics, and the added material also becomes a "mask"

Quote:


as far as the amount, i get that it is subjective, so heres a more specific question - given the projector and the potential for brightness and FL's, what is the darkest you would recommend before its 'too dark'? i suppose we can talk in 'terms' of SF ratings (which we can translate based on what you said above about the 2:1 ratio of NG:SF colorant comparison). that way i would have at least an upper and lower boundary of where i should be playing as far as darkness levels.

SF 2.5 4.0

Quote:


heres a practical question - aside from the potential reflection problems (lining up of mica, etc), would rolling/brushing a small sample of a mix give a decent approximation of what the final screen would look like? if so, might it be a good idea to make a few small samples with just a small of paint to hold in front of the PJ to decide what level of darkness/gold offset would work for me? i suppose samples can be sprayed too, but if i was experimenting with adding differing amounts of NG, the turnaround time would be a lot faster between tests if i didnt have to clean/prepare the gun each time.

Samples can be and usually are misleading unless substantial in size (2' x 3')

Personally speaking, your really not on such a knife-edge as far as it's being guesswork. Either of the suggested choices would do nicely. Everything is based upon need/future-proofing if desired, and work ethic. The suggestions come easily enough and you can bank on them if all the known criteria is provided.

If the SF Mix and Colorant components are correctly assembled, little or no Gold is required. If not....there are always fixes available if one does not forge ahead before asking why something looks "other than" Gray.With RS-MaxxMudd mixes, the Gray came from the paints base as much as from the Silver's tendency toward Gray. Silver tends to push Blue. So Gold was always a "in your back pocket if needed" thingee with a mix like RS-MaxxMudd.

Quote:


also, how much paint would be needed to cover a ~100"er (probably mostly light/dusters, as its my first go)? I would like to 'reserve' an amount for the main application, and then i can use some extra for the tests to see what level of NG i might want to add to the LL - make sense?

Make the prescribed mix and you'll have an excess of about 30-40%


Quote:


thanks - learning a lot here! the more you explain, the more questions i have

ya thin.....

S'why wer hear.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 87 Old 05-08-2012, 01:09 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
makes sense -
so the gold, when necessary, includes its mica which acounts for the added paint that comes with it - i.e. it pulls its own weight

4.0 - thats what i expected, so thats good to hear. btw when you mentioned adding 4oz's of gray (for example), did you mean the N5 from liquitex? or is there a certain gray you were referring to.

sounds good, so it sounds like starting with an LL mix, ill have extra to play with and see what i like. question though - when i see a color push (blue for example), how do i know when it should be fixed with paint, vs just calibrating the PJ? or should the screen always ideally be close neutral.

so in summary (from the top, so to speak), just to make sure i get the concept we are working out -
if we start with maxxmud standard and darken it, the extra silver +darker base may introduce grain/sparklies. in that light, we use LL with its less silver, but darker base, relying on lumens to make up for the loss of gain via mica, with better blacks because of the gray. make sense?

aside, is there more of a chance of sparklies in my case being that my seating distance will be 10-11'?

also not to go back in history, but now that you have explained some more, i went back and reread a lot of your posts, and i noticed this
"A 8.0 NG and your using "Low Lamp Mode" will give you great results for darkened room situations, and simply bumping up to "Normal Lamp" output should be all you'd ever need as far as dealing with modest amounts of controlled ambient light." - when you say "all i will ever need", what did you mean? i assume its not really *all* i would need, as that would imply i wouldnt benefit from going with a more advanced mix. did you mean to say "ALMOST all i would ever need"? or did you mean actually mean *all*, but given only a small amount of ambient light - whereas going to an advanced mix would work for more ambient situations? i hope that longwinded question makes sense, just want to make sure we are making the right choice

eh - i just reread again and there is one other thing i didnt clarify with you - in post 57 you mentioned that i can darken as necessary, starting with either LL OR standard. i must have missed the standard part on the first read through. i was assuming we were only darkening LL (also based on the earlier comment you mentioned about how you generally use standard 'as-is').
so from that, i ask - what would be the visible difference between starting with LL and darkening to X (an arbitrary amount of grayness), vs using standard and doing the same. in each case the color of the screen to the eye (and presumably the blacks when in use) would be similar, but would the standard have whiter whites? why would i not use standard then?
i know this is bordering on subjective like you said, and for that i apologize, i guess i still need some more nitty gritty details regarding how the two would behave (assuming they are both darkened to the same level, by eye).

also, i made a comment in this post, about the logic (which i thought i had right, but is now possibly missing something) about NOT using standard based on what we said earlier on page 1. i left it in even though it seems less correct./relevant now, so you can see my thought process.




sorry for all the nagging! just want to do right by the creators of these paint mixes and not come away upset that i didnt do it 'the mo bedderest i could'
artisanoo is offline  
post #63 of 87 Old 05-11-2012, 02:06 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
bump?...
artisanoo is offline  
post #64 of 87 Old 05-17-2012, 08:26 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

bump?...

Owwww.......

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #65 of 87 Old 05-17-2012, 08:56 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

makes sense -
so the gold, when necessary, includes its mica which acounts for the added paint that comes with it - i.e. it pulls its own weight

Pretty much...however with the inclusion of the latest, different components making up the reflective Base, less of such "Gold adjustment" is needed.

Quote:


4.0 - thats what i expected, so thats good to hear. btw when you mentioned adding 4oz's of gray (for example), did you mean the N5 from liquitex? or is there a certain gray you were referring to.

The Liquitex variety is a known neutral Gray of a confirmed N-rating. As such it's a pretty safe bet that it itself will not introduce any additional push when added to a basically neutral mix.

Quote:


sounds good, so it sounds like starting with an LL mix, ill have extra to play with and see what i like. question though - when i see a color push (blue for example), how do i know when it should be fixed with paint, vs just calibrating the PJ? or should the screen always ideally be close neutral.

Usually, any noticeable push is apparent as one sees it mixing up. If so, the addition of specific primaries, in small, diluted amounts will tend to effect a noticeable visual change as added, and when one looks at a Blue-ish-Gray / Red-ish-Gray / Green-ish Gray in front of them, and adds the suggested correction, the resulting change in color to a true Neutral Gray is easy to ascertain. In any case, you make such corrections a couple drops at a time. Then dipping a spoon into the mix, you slowly rinse the paint off into a white sink or bowl. If it's been changed to a true neutral Gray, you'll see it quite plainly under that sort of direct observation.

Quote:


so in summary (from the top, so to speak), just to make sure i get the concept we are working out -
if we start with maxxmud standard and darken it, the extra silver +darker base may introduce grain/sparklies. in that light, we use LL with its less silver, but darker base, relying on lumens to make up for the loss of gain via mica, with better blacks because of the gray. make sense?

That's the gist of it. The latter method being a bit more certain of avoiding the "specularity" that can occur with higher levels of metallic content.

Quote:


aside, is there more of a chance of sparklies in my case being that my seating distance will be 10-11'?

Only...I repeat ONLY if your levels of metallics are at/beyond a certain concentration...and you are overly sensitive to seeing tiny artifacts against a pristine, lightly colored background/content. Honestly...when people are not made aware if such in advance, 90% of them don't see anything wrong at all. That percentage does get changed when viewing distances and/or projector brightness/contrast specs rise, and all the more so if the Screen is darker than normal yet retains a high degree of gain.

Quote:


also not to go back in history,

But you will / are...right?

Quote:


....but now that you have explained some more, i went back and reread a lot of your posts, and i noticed this
"A 8.0 NG and your using "Low Lamp Mode" will give you great results for darkened room situations, and simply bumping up to "Normal Lamp" output should be all you'd ever need as far as dealing with modest amounts of controlled ambient light." - when you say "all i will ever need", what did you mean? i assume its not really *all* i would need, as that would imply i wouldnt benefit from going with a more advanced mix. did you mean to say "ALMOST all i would ever need"? or did you mean actually mean *all*, but given only a small amount of ambient light - whereas going to an advanced mix would work for more ambient situations? i hope that longwinded question makes sense, just want to make sure we are making the right choice

Really, that comment was based on believing you might be more that happy with a simple solution considering the PJ being used. But brook no mistake, advanced DIY Screen paint apps, when properly mated to the end user's circumstances can achieve results that go beyond expectations. You simply have to decide if that level of accomplishment is where you want to reach for. As siad before, if you don't contemplate going there...or immerse yourself in the plaudits and exclamatory comments of those who have, the end results you will get otherwise can...and would be considered PDG by most anyone's standards.

Quote:


eh - i just reread again and there is one other thing i didnt clarify with you

..your joking...right?

Quote:


in post 57 you mentioned that i can darken as necessary, starting with either LL OR standard. i must have missed the standard part on the first read through. i was assuming we were only darkening LL (also based on the earlier comment you mentioned about how you generally use standard 'as-is').
so from that, i ask - what would be the visible difference between starting with LL and darkening to X (an arbitrary amount of grayness), vs using standard and doing the same. in each case the color of the screen to the eye (and presumably the blacks when in use) would be similar, but would the standard have whiter whites? why would i not use standard then?
i know this is bordering on subjective like you said, and for that i apologize, i guess i still need some more nitty gritty details regarding how the two would behave (assuming they are both darkened to the same level, by eye).

The "Standard" is going to deliver better Blacks while doing a great job of maintaining gain...and the resulting better white level retention. But the LL will have even less an effort delivering even brighter whites because it is of a higher gain to start out with

Quote:


also, i made a comment in this post, about the logic (which i thought i had right, but is now possibly missing something) about NOT using standard based on what we said earlier on page 1. i left it in even though it seems less correct./relevant now, so you can see my thought process.

Oh yeah.........."I See You".

Quote:


sorry for all the nagging! just want to do right by the creators of these paint mixes and not come away upset that i didnt do it 'the mo bedderest i could'

Well that makes it a "awllllrighty then" kinda thing....so your record has been hereby expunged of all "
"Nag-ability" factors and has been relegated upward to, "Ask First-Squirt Later" reasoning.

You'll NEVER be taken to task for being careful and methodical in your efforts to achieve visual nirvana.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #66 of 87 Old 05-22-2012, 05:28 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
whew, been busy, finally getting a chance to respond.

ok, so as far as the gray ill pick up that N5 i mentioned, unless i can find a darker one (ill have to use less). theres a store around my work that i think carries the liquitex basics.


assuming that the standard does not exceed the amount of metallic to make sparkles then, as long as i dont mix it wrong..

so the last question i need to nail down is which recipe to start with -
I DO like the idea of getting nice deep blacks and decent performance with some lights on, which would imply that i may want to use *standard* with some extra NG. given my PJ, and the distance / size I am going to do, will i be able to run it in eco lamp with cinema/rec709 mode against that screen?
the reasoning is that it seems like since i will be trying to darken to where i like my blacks, the main difference between the modified LL/modified standard will be the amount of metallic ( i.e. after darkening to the same-ish gray level, i mean). so the more metallic in standard will help with the whites, whereas darkening the LL to the same level will have less metallic and therefore worse whites?

if you think that makes sense, i think what ill do is mix up the recipe and experiment a little with my gray adding. what is the best way to go about that without wasting the good paints? should i take some mix and add gray little by little and just brush some on to get an idea of the black levels each change gives me? i know brushing/rollingmight not be ideal for the final product but for testing blacklevels does it make sense? figure ill be able to get a covering coat easier that way for testing - unless you think it will be so totally different from sprayed that its worthless to test that way.
artisanoo is offline  
post #67 of 87 Old 05-22-2012, 11:16 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

whew, been busy, finally getting a chance to respond.

ok, so as far as the gray ill pick up that N5 i mentioned, unless i can find a darker one (ill have to use less). theres a store around my work that i think carries the liquitex basics.


assuming that the standard does not exceed the amount of metallic to make sparkles then, as long as i dont mix it wrong..

so the last question i need to nail down is which recipe to start with -
I DO like the idea of getting nice deep blacks and decent performance with some lights on, which would imply that i may want to use *standard* with some extra NG. given my PJ, and the distance / size I am going to do, will i be able to run it in eco lamp with cinema/rec709 mode against that screen?
the reasoning is that it seems like since i will be trying to darken to where i like my blacks, the main difference between the modified LL/modified standard will be the amount of metallic ( i.e. after darkening to the same-ish gray level, i mean). so the more metallic in standard will help with the whites, whereas darkening the LL to the same level will have less metallic and therefore worse whites?

I'd stick to slightly darkening the RS-MaxxMudd LL

Quote:


if you think that makes sense, i think what ill do is mix up the recipe and experiment a little with my gray adding. what is the best way to go about that without wasting the good paints?

Just go ahead and do as your told...er, as suggested.

Quote:


should i take some mix and add gray little by little and just brush some on to get an idea of the black levels each change gives me? i know brushing/rollingmight not be ideal for the final product but for testing blacklevels does it make sense? figure ill be able to get a covering coat easier that way for testing - unless you think it will be so totally different from sprayed that its worthless to test that way.

Brother......please.....just add 1 oz Colorant to the complete RS-MM LL Mix. Eyeball it. I'm pretty sure it will be what you want, but if not...add 1 more oz at most. Ditch the Roiller stuff. Just get'ta squirtin' n' get'ter dun!!

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #68 of 87 Old 05-23-2012, 08:46 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks, that makes sense - ill try the eyeball method -

curious, why do you now suggest sticking to LL? i know you mentioned earlier that darkening standard *could* be risky, but you also said at some point later on that if i want better blacks, use standard, vs better whites with LL. thats why i said what i said in the last post.
i suppose with the brightness of the PJ being high, i dont *need* as much silver. is that the main reason?
artisanoo is offline  
post #69 of 87 Old 06-13-2012, 12:32 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've made a terrible mistake. My wife went to pick up the tube of NG from a store near her work, and as i was looking online for the item code so she would know what to get, I realized that the 4oz tubes werent all that expensive. then my mind wandered a little more.
Now she is coming home with Napthol Crimson Red, Phthalocyanine Green, UltraMarine Blue Cadmium Yellow - Deep Hue, Gold, and some more silver.

so.... MM...... whats the most silverfiriest i can go with my PJ, from 11ft zoomed in to 110"?
you mentioned SF4 earlier. would that be in eco+cinema/rec709 mode?

i know there was a thread somewhere that compared some different levels of SF, getting pretty dark, but i cant remember where. any chance you know where that is offhand?


edit for clarification - I do not mean that i want to try and make some odd mashup of MM+SF, i mean i may as well just try SF if i am so concerned with black levels and ambient light. since i already have the gun, white pearl, poly, and most of the silver, seems i already spent most of the money anyway. and im not afraid to mix things smile.gif
artisanoo is offline  
post #70 of 87 Old 06-13-2012, 02:19 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
No Fear.

Hmmmmm.....,

So OK....SF 4.0 = 4 oz of Colorant.

Sic'em

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #71 of 87 Old 06-13-2012, 02:40 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
sounds good. feels like how i felt just before i jumped when i went skydiving smile.gif

ok fine its not that bad wink.gif excited though.

i knew there was a benefit to getting a light cannon and mounting it 11 feet from the screen smile.gif

--

lesson here, is that everyone can come to the right answer, it just takes some people longer to get there redface.gif


i am almost done patching my wall (the window, and doing once over to remove any bumps/texture that look problematic (not many, but i figured since i was already playing with compound, why not.)

after that, prime and paint smile.gif

plan on using 2 coats (more if i need to) of primer and painting on to that. is that good for a base since itll likely be fairly matte/flat?
i have some zinser 1-2-3 lying around, ill probably just use that if theres no issue.
artisanoo is offline  
post #72 of 87 Old 06-13-2012, 03:02 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Apply it smoothly and there should be no issues. But inspect the sanded & primed surface thoroughly. And again after your second Duster, so you can be certain the surface is pristine and free from blemishes.

2 Dusters on the surface are sparse enough to not affect or re-tard any small necessary repairs that become obvious once a high contrast coating starts to build up.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #73 of 87 Old 06-14-2012, 07:01 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
thank ye kindly smile.gif
will update when i get started with the actual fun part - i had to rip off one piece of the joint tape, it wasn't laying flat and didn't seem to want to be coerced into doing so, so that will set me back a little, getting that area smooth.
artisanoo is offline  
post #74 of 87 Old 06-18-2012, 12:39 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
well, i got something done. taped up all around the area for the screen with masking paper and frog tape, and sprayed on some gray glidden primer. I was going to just use regular primer, but since the general consensus seems to be that gray makes it easier to see if the surface is smooth etc, figured it was worth the trouble since i would much rather find an issue now, than after the final screen paint goes up...

so far so good, although after first (second really, but the first was a very light duster to get an idea of how the primer will spray) coat, i think i got too close to the wall in 2 areas, so ill need to lightly sand them (tonight i hope, wanted to give it enough time to become sandable ) before the next coat(s) of primer. the reason i am waiting to sand is simply because i didnt notice the slight runs until it was too late. i actually waited a while to see if there would be any runs, but didn't see any and so i left to let it dry. seems when i left the room the paint decided to misbehave smile.gif by the time i saw what was happening, it was too dry to roll off, but still too wet to sand. i got a little bit off with a roller but the rest will be sanded smooth.

once that is done and i am satisfied ( hoping/praying that i dont find anything that i missed during the final pre-primer sanding that would require any more joint compound to fix. its officially my least favorite thing... smile.gif ), ill spray on some UPW for the base coat.

even with the bad areas that need touchups, I must say the gray primered wall looks way nicer than the light blue wall that it is replacing tongue.gif
artisanoo is offline  
post #75 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 11:31 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
This could be considered, "The Great Awakening".

Why? Because I was beginning to fall asleep waiting for some progress! biggrin.gif

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #76 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 12:17 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
so, i went ahead and dunned it (almost).

thought i would share a basic summary of what ive done so far, along with some observations - its very long and wordy, but i just figured id share as much as possible to help other diy'ers.

1) skimmed the wall with joint compound as best i could. there are some barely perceptible uneven area, but they are only see- able with a strong side light - when the projector is on, they disappear.

2) primed with glidden gray. I was originally going to just use white primer, but i figured it should heed the advice of MMan and use the gray to help get a better handle on the condition of the wall.
Sprayed a few dusters and one or 2 wetter coats to get nice uniform coverage over the just-skimmed wall. this stuff seems to be pretty good - it needed to be thinned a bunch, but dried with a pretty smooth/hard finish.
To be honest, the color was pretty nice too, not much gain obviously , but otherwise i wonder if it would make a nice one-can gray screen. This is just based on looking and testing some PJ video on it for fun, to get an idea of what a gray screen looks like in use - but i have no idea if its actually color correct or not.

3) once i was satisfied the wall was as good as it was going to get with my nonexistent drywalling skills, it was on to UPW. i used the new version of the behr 1850 UPW. i was already buying it for the SF, so it seemed sensible.
I dont remember how many coats i did, probably similar in count to the primer. i just went until it looked uniformly white, then did one more light coat for good measure.

4) hurray, the fun part! mixed up a batch of SF 4 (to be specific, i used the mix on the 'silver fire mix' thread, which has the graduated amounts of the base components).

4a) first i tackled the colorant. All i has on hand was a 3ml (yes, t-h-r-e-e) syringe used for baby medication etc, sooo thats what i used.
It wasnt too bad, although it was nerve-wracking when doing the 50ml of red with it. Kept thinking i was losing count, but it worked out in the end.
Incidentally, since the 3ml has .1ml gradations on it, it wasn't hard to be accurate with it.
(funny side point.. half way through the colorant mixing, i noticed that because of the way i was holding the syringe, i was slowly rubbing off the markings rolleyes.gif. thankfully i noticed before they were gone!... that would have sucked.. smile.gif )

Just because its a question people always seem to ask (including myself), ill elaborate on how i did it, which served me well. first i measured out the 100ml water into a container, and squirted out into that (found that advice on the forum somewhere, awesome idea).

To make sure i didn't get any air bubbles when drawing up the paint, i held the tube in one hand with slight squeezing pressure on it, as i pulled up the syringe (with one hand - kind of hard to explain how i did that but if anyone wants to know i can try to elaborate).

The colors seemed to want some coaxing to mix well, so make sure its all mixed in so you dont get any weird effects later (i.e. if your yellow is stuck the bottom). i used a clear container for this, so i was able to visually inspect the sides/bottom to make sure all the paint was incorporated into the mixture.

The critical point here that i want to note is the color. I know this has been said many times on various threads but its worth repeating i suppose, since i found it very helpful to keep in mind when mixing the colorant. it might NOT look like the gray you expect after mixing well. mine in fact looked like a brownish purplish chocolaty color. BUT after doing the 'rinse some off a spoon into a white sink test', it looked perfectly nice and gray. I have seen people post that they redid their colorant after seeing what they thought was incorrect, but do the rinse test first - as MMan said ( somewhere) the colorant doesn't always look the same under direct light vs when rinsed off (or mixed in with the rest of the paint for that matter). so dont worry unless that rinse test fails too.

4b) finally, the base/viscosity stuff. nothing going on here really, its pretty straightforward i guess. I started with the base 24 oz (IIRC) water, since i didnt want to overthin it preemptively - then when i put some paint into gun can for spraying, i diluted a tad bit more, just using the speed of runoff as my indicator. (i had an idea of what to look for since ive used the gun for latex before - otherwise just follow all the advice the experts have given regarding the nylon filter test etc).

5) paint! I put up a few dusters, and then 1 or 2 wetter coats so far.
this is where i did something stupid eek.gif
When i was testing to see if the first wetter coat was dry (about 20+ minutes later), i lightly touched part of the screen. it was dry, so far so good. so i tested another area. woops. it wasnt dry yet, and the genius that i am, the area is right in the main area of the screen. doh. some paint came off on my fingers and there were white finger prints on the wall rolleyes.gif

anyway, i let that finish drying completely (didnt touch it again after that!). then I feathered in ,duster style, over that area, and continued with the next (also a bit wetter than duster) coat. at this point, the fingerprint looks mostly gone, and honesty if not for that, i would do one more duster and call it done, it looks great otherwise.

so tonight i will probably do another light coat + 1/2 dusters and call it complete.

this was only a 112"er, so i have a lot of paint left.. wondering if i can experiment with it ( if i can find time... now that this is done i need to move on to carpet, setting up my equipment, and other stuff in the house that needs doing). or maybe ill just hang on to it for when i get the ok to paint more screens somewhere else in the house biggrin.gif




Anyway, i tried to post up everything i remembered, hope it helps someone.
i will try to get some screen shots at some point, if people are interested. though I need some time to straighten up the room first and set up all my stuff.




OH - i totally forgot the most important part of the post... how does it look?!?
well, to be honest, i didnt know what to expect, but i am impressed.
first impressions -
as of this morning (after the coats from last night dried) i see no annoying glare at all. no hotspotting that i can detect, and no graininess.
there is a **tiny** bit of what i guess i would call a glimmer to the screen in some bright areas, but i assume that will go away as the paint cures. TO BE CLEAR though, i am only mentioning it for full disclosure. It does not actually take away from the picture at all. its not even close to what i would call 'sparklies/granularity/graininess/whathaveyou'. its barely perceptible and honestly, the picture is super clear and enjoyable.

in the dark, on cinema mode, it clearly looks great - nice and bright , with nice contrast and color clarity.

but the screen really does its business when i turn the lights on.
for context, my current 'worst case situation' is as follows:
- white ceiling (for now - hoping to do something about that with fabric soon)
- light carpet (for now)
- light coming in from hallway which opens onto the screen wall (ie the light hits from side)
-dual tube fluorescent (the kind you see recessed in the ceiling in basements) not 4 feet from the front of the screen, with another slightly off to the side of the screen also 4 feet from the screen wall.
-screen is MAYBE 8 inches from the ceiling, maybe less.
so in summary - bad situation.

HOWEVER, when i put the PJ in normal/dynamic mode, it looks great and totally watchable. ( i can do cinema mode as well, but it doesn't have quite as much pop, which i suppose is expected on a darker screen). point is, throwing the ar100u's lumens at this screen really makes it shine.

note - i have the PJ on ECO mode. dynamic+normal bulb makes it ridiculously bright - i dont see a need for normal bulb mode.

as i said, ill try to get some shots posted when i get a chance, since people do like seeing these things in action, and also since I haven't seen any posts about SF 4 with my specific projector (pt-ar100u)



holy cow thats the longest post ive ever posted.
artisanoo is offline  
post #77 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 12:19 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

This could be considered, "The Great Awakening".
Why? Because I was beginning to fall asleep waiting for some progress! biggrin.gif

biggrin.gif

i actually started on my response above before you posted, but it took a while to get it all down - i was starting to fall asleep too, but for different reasons (so tired.... i was up until almost 3am doing it, i was too excited to go to sleep smile.gif )
artisanoo is offline  
post #78 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 12:29 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

biggrin.gif
i actually started on my response above before you posted, but it took a while to get it all down - i was starting to fall asleep too, but for different reasons (so tired.... i was up until almost 3am doing it, i was too excited to go to sleep smile.gif )

Well that's OK then. I can easily relate to such enthusiasm.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #79 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 12:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Well that's OK then. I can easily relate to such enthusiasm.

smile.gif - what do you think of my experience above? i think it went pretty well considering the sleep deprivation involved.
artisanoo is offline  
post #80 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 01:15 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I would have to wait until I catch up on my sleep. biggrin.gif

Actually, in the words of someone in the past who's name is forgotten;

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."

"..........and again......"

"..........and again......"

"..........and again......"

"..........and again......"

"..........and again......"

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #81 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 01:17 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
ha, ok, sounds good - looking forward to any advice/feedback on the above (mostly it was my observations for more diy'ers to get an idea of the process, and how well it turned/is turning out)

get some sleep !
artisanoo is offline  
post #82 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 01:30 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Screenies please.

Take them on Auto, from 15'-20' feet away, using only the Zoom to frame the Screen with some small area of wall around the screen visible.

The attenuation the Zoom provides will help control the effective brightness any screen with positive gain will introduce. Even on Economy, in a dark room, the amount of disparity between the Screen's brightness and the Room's darkness can cause the Camera's metering to fail to balance out the brightness, cause a washed out image in the camera. basically, it's a case where when you see an image in your LCD Preview mode that looks close to what your own eyes see, you probably where you want to be. The real proof comes after you upload the images onto your Computer. If they are not representative of what you've been seeing, go back and take more shots with more/less zoom involved.

Never....ever "post process" your images save for Cropping. To do so destroys both validity of the end results, and personal credibility as far as people being able to take your word as far as what you see before your eyes.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #83 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 01:34 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisanoo View Post

ha, ok, sounds good - looking forward to any advice/feedback on the above (mostly it was my observations for more diy'ers to get an idea of the process, and how well it turned/is turning out)
get some sleep !

I plan on it.....sometime. For now it's off to finish up my own little current project. A 92"er SF 4.0 graced by a Epson 8700ub

As far as your own effort to relay your experience, it's pretty exemplary and yet really about as concise as anything like that can be and still relate what info people need to know.

So keep at it....., and TAKE THOSE SCREEN SHOTS asap.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
post #84 of 87 Old 06-20-2012, 02:14 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
yep, as i mentioned above, i plan on getting shots taken as soon as i can.
unfortunately i cant take your advice 100%, since my room is less then 15' deep smile.gif its actually about 11-12' (that's why my throw distance is what it is.)

ill try the rest though.
just wondering, why you suggest auto and not manual? the reason i was actually thinking about manual was because then i could take multiple shots with the same exact aperture/shutter speed , so that i can show comparisons between lights on/off, different bulb modes, etc.
Quote:
As far as your own effort to relay your experience, it's pretty exemplary and yet really about as concise as anything like that can be and still relate what info people need to know.

and thanks for the kind words smile.gif
artisanoo is offline  
post #85 of 87 Old 06-30-2012, 04:29 AM
Advanced Member
 
WereWolf84's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 24
artisanoo, any screenshots of the combination of AR100 + SF 4.0 ?
WereWolf84 is online now  
post #86 of 87 Old 07-13-2012, 10:47 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
artisanoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
just an update, since i was asked for screenshots from 2 people so far - i am trying to finish up a frame/masking contraption right now, so thats taking up my time and the reason i havent set up any nice shots yet.
i will try to get something as soon as the screen is back to a usable state.

i already relayed this to werewolf in PM, but just thought i would mention it here in case anyone else is interested in ar100+sf4 pictures.
artisanoo is offline  
post #87 of 87 Old 07-13-2012, 11:03 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Awww....who cares. rolleyes.gif




Only everybody! biggrin.gif

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is online now  
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