A better grey screen - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 12:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Gator123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just wanted to post a review of the original ME for those that are thinking about using it on a former Parkland Plastic screen.

First a quick background...

I had happily used a Parkland Plastic screen for about 1.5 years with my old Sony VPLW400Q in a completely light controlled environment. Then I got the upgrade bug and ordered the sample set from DaLite and got hooked on the "pop" of the high power fabric and ordered a 52" x 92" pull down that I mounted above my Parkland screen and pull down in front of it. The image on the high power was way better than the Parkland for viewing animated films, video games and sports, however, dark movies were sometimes a challenge as the blacks got washed out skin tones looked just so so. Also, while the 400Q does a good job on minimizing SDE, the High Power screen really brought out whatever SDE there is on brightly lit scenes. However, I enjoyed the High Power so much with TV and XBOX viewing, that I ended up just leaving it down all the time. When I read this thread about ME and saw all the spectacular screen shots, I was envious of the colors and fleshtones so I thought why not give it a try. I already had the old Parkland Screen that was just hanging behind my High Power gathering dust, and the paint and rollers were less than $20.

For those with Parkland screens, all I did was get a "very fine" grit sanding sponge/block and rough up the parkland a little bit (maybe 2 minutes of light sanding) I then rolled on 1 coat of Kilz2, let it dry for an hour and then rolled on a coat of ME. I let it dry overnight and rolled on the second coat of ME in the morning. I used the white small foam rollers from Home Depot and they worked very well and gave a very smooth finish. I let the screen dry for 3 or 4 hours and then hung it back up.

I re calibrated one of my video settings for the new screen using the old VE and then used the typical DVD's (Monsters Inc., LOTR) to do some A/B tests with the High Power. I pulled the high power down half way over the ME screen and would flip back and forth between the video setting for the 2 screens.

With the Monsters Inc DVD, the High Power had a brighter overall picture, but surprisingly, the colors were almost as vibrant with the ME as what I had with the High Power, and the blacks were way better and the SDE was significantly reduced in the bright scenes. Overall, I would say it was a toss up with that DVD, with the edge probably going to the High Power screen. For the LOTR DVD, I felt the ME was significantly better due to better blacks, added shadow detail and really spectacular looking skin/flesh tones. The whole image was just "smoother" and more "film like" than with the High Power. I watched the whole Matrix Reloaded later in the day and I again could not get over how good all the characters skin tones looked. I did not A/B it with the High Power, as I was so happy with the image I did not want to change it.

The only problem I am having with the ME, is that it is apparently not very forgiving of waves in material you are painting. I guess my Parkland material bows out slightly in the areas where I have wood support slats behind it. While I never noticed anything in the years when I used the plain material, since painting it with ME, I notice what looks like waves in the image when a shot pans from one side of the screen to the other. I guess I will have to try to figure out a way to "flatten" my screen out.

So in conclusion, I think the ME is a great alternative to a commercial screen, that worked well in my application. I think I will continue to use my High Power for XBOX and watching sports, but I will definitely be using the ME screen for "live action" movie viewing. I think animated features are a toss up between the two. Finally, I want to send a thank you to CMRA and MM for doing all the research and posting all the screen shots that inspired me to give it a try.
Gator123 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Przybylski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by MississippiMan
Beer......., mixed liberally with sweat equity.

Jimmy, your application should follow the procedure I use for Wall painting.

Pure Silver Metallic. DO NOT Cut with anything.

refined topcoat mix. All paints are Flat latex

1 Quart Beir Deep Base (1300)
1 Quart Beir Ultra pure White
1 Quart Beir "White Opal" Pearlescence
1 "48" particle droplet of Red Oxide
(...any pinkish hue in the mix does NOT manifest itself in the finished topcoat.)

"Dry Roller" method of applying gooey, thick paint:

Try loading your roller with either the SM or topcoat mix, then press out as much as you can back onto the top of the roller tray. Use the "dry roller' on the surface and apply more pressure than nomal to get the paint onto the surface. Repeatedly roll over the entire area with that "dry roller" intil your coverage is even. let dry, (it won't take nearly as long) and repeat.

At worst, you'll lay down a excellent initial coat of either paint.

MississippiMan,

A couple questions (okay, this is REALLY starting to sound like the Ddog mixture that I have now, minus the Pearlessence) but hoepfully it will be a much improved method.


QUESTIONS:

Is your inital base-coat the Behr Silver Metallic?

What's a "48" particle droplet?

And would you also recommend spraying this mixture on?


Thanks! I can't wait to try this...

iPad 2 is the coolest thing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azkg-Bj6GVs
Joe Przybylski is offline  
post #453 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 03:48 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,246
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:


Originally posted by Joe Przybylski
MississippiMan,

A couple questions (okay, this is REALLY starting to sound like the mixture that I have now, minus the Pearlessence) but hoepfully it will be a much improved method.


QUESTIONS:

Is your initial base-coat the Behr Silver Metallic?

What's a "48" particle droplet?

And would you also recommend spraying this mixture on?


Thanks! I can't wait to try this...

Hey Joe,

Yeah, I was surprised the other day when I asked for a copy of DDoggs mix and it came back as close as it did to my mix. Just goes to show a good idea formulates in like brains when said brains are put to the task of coming up with something based on practical reasoning.

One big difference though, DDogg combined (diluted) his Silver Metallic with Glaze. I save the "Glaze" effect as part of the translucent Top Coat mix and use the White Opal Pearlescence instead.

When getting Paint mixed, colorant is usually added in the following increments.
1 Ounce (Oz.) That's a lot of colorant.
or.........,
it is added in smaller increments consisting of a specific number of color particles contained within a given amount, in this case, a droplet of Base.

Values are stated as:

24 particles 48 particles 96 particles

24 particles in one droplet is less color than 48 or 96 particles in the same size droplet. Sometimes, a certain color calls for 2-3-or even 5 droplets of a certain particle count, or instead, the color mixes better with just one 96 particle droplet. The paint Guy always knows what's needed by referencing his Color booklet.

When you try to create a custom mix, it is wise to start out with the lower numbers. also, mixing any colorant into Clear or Deep base will result in the color manifesting itself much more than if it was mixed into a already colored paint.


Finally, spraying is by far the best method, if you can do so. Using a High Volume Low Pressure (HVLP) gun, preferably a Gravity Feed variety, will get you the best results by allowing the air pressure to be devoted to spraying, and not siphoning up the thick gooey stuff.

I'm a Rollin' kinda guy, but having used a HVLP gun a couple times now, I'm seriously thinking of making the jump and spending the $200.00 or so it takes to get started. the Silver metallic goes on like a dream via sprayer. and the Top coat is every bit as thick, so it also benefits from spraying.

But recently, by using a "dry roller" method, I've achieved a finish that is pretty darn close to spraying. I say "close' because spraying is wondrous indeed.

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

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #454 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 03:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimmyDaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Weatherford, Texas
Posts: 1,091
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Does this mean that Mississippi Man's formula with plexiglass clearly outshines CMRA's new silver screen formula? How do they compare with each other without the plexiglass? Also, how much does the type of plexiglass you're using cost and is it worth the extra money to get these images?

Also, will either of you provide a detailed, step-by-step description of how to make this screen from start to finish? I'm sure I speak for many on the forum when I say I truly appreciate all of your hard work and time put into making this screen.

Thanks Jimmy!
JimmyDaves is offline  
post #455 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 05:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kamel407's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Which is better? Doing DIY for $200 or buying a Stewart Grayhawk Screen (just the screen) for $300?
Kamel407 is offline  
post #456 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 06:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
scoob5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Where are you getting a GrayHawk for that price? And what size? Nowhere close to the price I've seen for a 100" screen.

Something profound

scoob5555 is offline  
post #457 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kamel407's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
oh sorry what should the price be? I am looking at the Z2 so I was thinking 110" 16:9
Kamel407 is offline  
post #458 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 07:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
scoob5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Talk to the AV Science guys (Daniel or Jason) for a quote. Think 2X your idea.

Something profound

scoob5555 is offline  
post #459 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 07:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kamel407's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
wow for just the material?
Kamel407 is offline  
post #460 of 918 Old 12-15-2003, 07:54 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,246
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:


Originally posted by JimmyDaves
Does this mean that Mississippi Man's formula with plexiglass clearly outshines CMRA's new silver screen formula?

<<>>>>>>>

How do they compare with each other without the Plexiglas?

<<<<>>>>>>>

Also, how much does the type of Plexiglas you're using cost and is it worth the extra money to get these images?

A really big piece, say 5' x 9' should cost approx. $100.00

Yes, it really, really is worth it, IF you really, REALLY want something totally unique, and that delivers exceptional results not found elsewhere, even in commercial screens. Even ultra high gain screens present drawbacks such as graininess, a required curvature, and of course, expense.

If expense is really a factor on any screen expenditure coming in under $250.00, (...cheapskates!) then by adding that criteria to create a chosen list, here is how it shapes up.

At approx. $200.00 TOTAL cost, The SD/MM Plexiglas screen is the ONLY real consideration for those willing to go to the trouble to DIY. That the end result offers NO compromises is the icing on the cake. The "Painted Wall" Pure SM/MM topcoat method is the best for those filled with fear at the thought of spending $200.00 and it can come in at about $80.00 total.
Then, along comes ME Lite, 2 Quarts ME (with 50% less Thallo Green) cut with 1 Quart Beir Ultra Pure White Flat and laced with a single 1/96 oz. droplet of Red Oxide.

Next down the list.....some poor old Matte White screen from......whomever.

Also, will either of you provide a detailed, step-by-step description of how to make this screen from start to finish? I'm sure I speak for many on the forum when I say I truly appreciate all of your hard work and time put into making this screen.

Thanks Jimmy!


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

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #461 of 918 Old 12-16-2003, 01:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
All this 'what is best' talk can really be summed up like this:

Want a 'No Brainer, No Work' fix? Go to HD and buy a $14.00 Do-Able white matte panel. You'll get a nice image.

Want an improved image? Flip the board over, prime it and then paint it with ME. Add $7.00 to the cost.

Want something "Killer" that sets a new standard in DIY designs? Build yourself a "Super Deluxe".

Want something "Exotic" with lots of snap and contrast, think 'silver'.

Want something that is the talk of the Home Theater world? Take a second on the house and buy a "SilverStar".

Keyword Search: Do-Able, Misty Evening, Super Deluxe, 'silver', silverstar.
CMRA is offline  
post #462 of 918 Old 12-17-2003, 12:26 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by ender611
There have been a few reflective undercoat formulas by yourself, MississipiMan and others but it looks like you are settling on the pure silver metallic ( behr ) like MississippiMan. Can it be said that two coats of primer and one or two coats of pure SM is the best base over and above any rustoleam, high gloss enamel, pearlescent or other reflective bases. Is it the breakfast of champions?


A little more experimentation led me to believe SM may not be the only undercoat. The key is 'reflective'. I have every intention to try 'gold' also. To date I have had success using SM, Rustoleum Metalic silver, and even aluminum foil when sandwiching plexiglass between coats. I see no reason why other reflective bases won't work.
CMRA is offline  
post #463 of 918 Old 12-18-2003, 09:17 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by Gator123
Just wanted to post a review of the original ME for those that are thinking about using it on a former Parkland Plastic screen.

First a quick background...

I had happily used a Parkland Plastic screen for about 1.5 years with my old Sony VPLW400Q in a completely light controlled environment. Then I got the upgrade bug and ordered the sample set from DaLite and got hooked on the "pop" of the high power fabric and ordered a 52" x 92" pull down that I mounted above my Parkland screen and pull down in front of it. The image on the high power was way better than the Parkland for viewing animated films, video games and sports, however, dark movies were sometimes a challenge as the blacks got washed out skin tones looked just so so. Also, while the 400Q does a good job on minimizing SDE, the High Power screen really brought out whatever SDE there is on brightly lit scenes. However, I enjoyed the High Power so much with TV and XBOX viewing, that I ended up just leaving it down all the time. When I read this thread about ME and saw all the spectacular screen shots, I was envious of the colors and fleshtones so I thought why not give it a try. I already had the old Parkland Screen that was just hanging behind my High Power gathering dust, and the paint and rollers were less than $20.

For those with Parkland screens, all I did was get a "very fine" grit sanding sponge/block and rough up the parkland a little bit (maybe 2 minutes of light sanding) I then rolled on 1 coat of Kilz2, let it dry for an hour and then rolled on a coat of ME. I let it dry overnight and rolled on the second coat of ME in the morning. I used the white small foam rollers from Home Depot and they worked very well and gave a very smooth finish. I let the screen dry for 3 or 4 hours and then hung it back up.

I re calibrated one of my video settings for the new screen using the old VE and then used the typical DVD's (Monsters Inc., LOTR) to do some A/B tests with the High Power. I pulled the high power down half way over the ME screen and would flip back and forth between the video setting for the 2 screens.

With the Monsters Inc DVD, the High Power had a brighter overall picture, but surprisingly, the colors were almost as vibrant with the ME as what I had with the High Power, and the blacks were way better and the SDE was significantly reduced in the bright scenes. Overall, I would say it was a toss up with that DVD, with the edge probably going to the High Power screen. For the LOTR DVD, I felt the ME was significantly better due to better blacks, added shadow detail and really spectacular looking skin/flesh tones. The whole image was just "smoother" and more "film like" than with the High Power. I watched the whole Matrix Reloaded later in the day and I again could not get over how good all the characters skin tones looked. I did not A/B it with the High Power, as I was so happy with the image I did not want to change it.

The only problem I am having with the ME, is that it is apparently not very forgiving of waves in material you are painting. I guess my Parkland material bows out slightly in the areas where I have wood support slats behind it. While I never noticed anything in the years when I used the plain material, since painting it with ME, I notice what looks like waves in the image when a shot pans from one side of the screen to the other. I guess I will have to try to figure out a way to "flatten" my screen out.

So in conclusion, I think the ME is a great alternative to a commercial screen, that worked well in my application. I think I will continue to use my High Power for XBOX and watching sports, but I will definitely be using the ME screen for "live action" movie viewing. I think animated features are a toss up between the two. Finally, I want to send a thank you to CMRA and MM for doing all the research and posting all the screen shots that inspired me to give it a try.

There is much to like, indeed. No screen design does everything perfectly. For a plain 'vanilla' solution it's hard to beat. Cheap and easy too. The member who took down his Grayhawk in favor of ME was the best testimonial.
CMRA is offline  
post #464 of 918 Old 12-19-2003, 06:35 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by JimmyDaves
Kamel and Shedrock:


Hopefully tomorrow I will get the ball rolling and start the process with the screen. I'm also awaiting further developments from the "meeting of the minds" with Mississippi Man and CMRA. Perhaps their brainstorming will come up with a potential "key" ingredient.

Thanks! Jimmy

I found the "Key ingredient" long ago. SO DID NIKE. It's called "Just do it"
More importantly, that's how DIY designs improve. Once you are on track you have something tangible to work with. From there the creative juices start flowing with the "what ifs". Aim higher, gentlemen.
CMRA is offline  
post #465 of 918 Old 12-21-2003, 10:20 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
and those 'what ifs' turn into RESULTS. Collectively, WE, are now at the point where several DIY screen designs can top their much more expensive commercial counterparts. And, we had the satisfaction of doing it ourselves.
CMRA is offline  
post #466 of 918 Old 12-23-2003, 01:12 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by CMRA
A little more experimentation led me to believe SM may not be the only undercoat. The key is 'reflective'. I have every intention to try 'gold' also. To date I have had success using SM, Rustoleum Metalic silver, and even aluminum foil when sandwiching plexiglass between coats. I see no reason why other reflective bases won't work.

Dateline 12-22-2003. Add a new 'refective' to the mix, mirrors. Works like a champ but demands more translucent top layers to prevent haloing.
CMRA is offline  
post #467 of 918 Old 12-23-2003, 06:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by CMRA
Dateline 12-22-2003. Add a new 'refective' to the mix, mirrors. Works like a champ but demands more translucent top layers to prevent haloing.

Latest comparison screenshots on scoob5555's thread, starting with post #472.
CMRA is offline  
post #468 of 918 Old 12-26-2003, 11:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Okay, I decided to part with $11 and make a small ME screen. Picked up a quart of ME and a 2'x4' fiberboard panel from Home Depot. Primed it and then laid on 2 coats of ME. Then I said this screen up parallel to my small Parkland screen. Using a Panasonic LCD projector that has a bit of red push, my findings were:

* The Parkland is definitely brighter. In previous comparisons to Dalite and Draper 1.0 matte white screens, I have estimated the Parkland gain to be approx 0.95, with the white being very close to as "pure" as the commercial screens. The ME's gain was definitely down a couple of notches. Don't know for sure but would guess it to be around 0.85 .

* Colors are subtlely altered on ME. This goes for all colors. But it is more noticable to my eyes on some colors than others. It isn't just a matter of them being a bit darker, there is a slight color shift. This was most noticable to me when viewing a desert scene. The sand on my Parkland (and my TV) was your typical beige'ish sand color. However on the ME screen, it shifted to a grayer cast, less beige. Not just darker sandy beige but a color shift to a grayer tone. Flesh tones were also changed, but less noticably. In well lit scenes, I felt the flesh tones on the Parkland were more realistic by a slight margin. I have no way to adjust R-G-B levels on my projector so I could not attempt to compensate for the color shift.

* Dark area detail was better on the ME. I was surprised by the difference. Fine textures that were a bit washed out on the Parkland were cleaner on the ME screen. This characteristic influenced me into perceiving that the overall resolution was sharper on ME.

* All colors were muted a bit on ME. By adjusting color levels and brightness, some of this was overcome.

* For reasons unknown to me, I must agree with others who have stated that the screen door effect appeared to be harder to notice on the ME screen.

It was impossible to compare the screens side-by-side with both at their optimal settings, as I was bumping the brightness setting up by a good 8-10 points on a 64 point scale for the ME.

I don't yet know which I prefer. I certainly enjoyed re-watching some dimly lit scenes on the ME. Contrast appeared to be improved, black levels were deeper, and fine detail was better presented. But on that desert scene, the sand color was unnatural and bugged me a bit, and on bright colorful scenes the ME black level was better, but the colors not quite as vibrant.

I may trot back to HD and pick up a quart of the lighter, more neutral "Snowfield" gray and paint the backside of my fiberboard.

Certainly worth a look. It could be that after viewing several hours of video on the ME screen, that I will come to either prefer it or the Parkland white. Don't know as yet. At this time I do look forward re-watching a few of my DVDs that contain a lot of low-light scenes. After playing around with some of the other tints, I'll probably make an 80" screen (biggest I can accomodate) with the one I like best.
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #469 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 04:19 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,246
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:


Originally posted by Tom_Bombadil
Okay, I decided to part with $11 and make a small ME screen. Picked up a quart of ME and a 2'x4' fiberboard panel from Home Depot. Primed it and then laid on 2 coats of ME. Then I said this screen up parallel to my small Parkland screen. Using a Panasonic LCD projector that has a bit of red push, my findings were:

Hello Tom!
If I may, I will clarify a few things about ME and derivitives thereof. I will comment on each paragraph in turn.


Quote:



* The Parkland is definitely brighter. In previous comparisons to and Draper 1.0 matte white screens, I have estimated the Parkland gain to be approx 0.95, with the white being very close to as "pure" as the commercial screens. The ME's gain was definitely down a couple of notches. Don't know for sure but would guess it to be around 0.85 .

This finding is pretty much common sense. The Parkland is a White surface, the ME is a Grey/Green hue specifically meant to enhance contrast.
ME was created, so to speak, to help those with PJs contrast ratios at or about 500:1 to 700:1 Pump out a LCD image with 800 lumens behind it and a Parkland will get the job done well enough to please all who haven't experienced as good or better. Sacrifices were nade in the "whites" and cretain colors to obtain satisfying black levels.

But ME hit with 1600 Lumens or more exhibits none of the failing points you've mentioned here. In fact, by adding more Lamp Black, and Thallo Green, I ace sucessfully adapted the mix to work splendidly with a 20-HD / PLV-70 @ 2200 lumens.

ME's weaknesses have led CMRA & I down other paths that will astound, delight, and really, make you tremble with excitement and joy should you experience what is coming in DIY screens. More on that teaser later.

Quote:



* Colors are subtlety altered on ME. This goes for all colors. But it is more noticeable to my eyes on some colors than others. It isn't just a matter of them being a bit darker, there is a slight color shift. This was most noticeable to me when viewing a desert scene. The sand on my Parkland (and my TV) was your typical beige'ish sand color. However on the ME screen, it shifted to a grayer cast, less beige. Not just darker sandy beige but a color shift to a grayer tone. Flesh tones were also changed, but less noticeably. In well lit scenes, I felt the flesh tones on the Parkland were more realistic by a slight margin. I have no way to adjust R-G-B levels on my projector so I could not attempt to compensate for the color shift.

No need to elaborate again, save to say, that comparing a white Parkland surface to a mid-level Grey is not a practical approach. Trouble is, I don't think there is one, unless there is a variety of PJs to shoot images onto both surfaces and compare. Sounds Like a "Shootout" to me!


Quote:



* Dark area detail was better on the ME. I was surprised by the difference. Fine textures that were a bit washed out on the Parkland were cleaner on the ME screen. This characteristic influenced me into perceiving that the overall resolution was sharper on ME.

The Thallo green acts as a "lens" to amplify certain wavelengths of light. These 'darker' (longer) light waves happen to fall within the range of 80% of all shadow enhanced detail, where subtle shades give both depth, curvature, and a fine graduating area between light and darker areas.

Usually, only CRTs could deliver those types of results. It was the terrific enhancement of Blacks that set everyone to ME'ing. It was also the crushed whites and muted colors that made ME into strictly a "Lazy Man's" One Coat screen, providing the mix matches up well with the PJ's attributes.


Quote:



* All colors were muted a bit on ME. By adjusting color levels and brightness, some of this was overcome.

Screen shots would have been nice. What are ya hidin'?


Quote:



* For reasons unknown to me, I must agree with others who have stated that the screen door effect appeared to be harder to notice on the ME screen.

The combination of the Grey in ME almost matches the exact color of the PJs
Pixel grid. The lessening of the overall luminosity, as well as the enhancement of the sharpness without too much overt graininess.

Quote:



It was impossible to compare the screens side-by-side with both at their optimal settings, as I was bumping the brightness setting up by a good 8-10 points on a 64 point scale for the ME.

Screwed up the Black levels doing that, I bet


Quote:



I don't yet know which I prefer. I certainly enjoyed re-watching some dimly lit scenes on the ME. Contrast appeared to be improved, black levels were deeper, and fine detail was better presented. But on that desert scene, the sand color was unnatural and bugged me a bit, and on bright colorful scenes the ME black level was better, but the colors not quite as vibrant.

See above dissertation.


Quote:



I may trot back to HD and pick up a quart of the lighter, more neutral "Snowfield" gray and paint the backside of my fiberboard.

Attention! It's the Thallo Green that allows for shadow detail AND low lightwill working

Certainly worth a look. It could be that after viewing several hours of video on the ME screen, that I will come to either prefer it or the Parkland white. Don't know as yet. At this time I do look forward re-watching a few of my DVDs that contain a lot of low-light scenes. After playing around with some of the other tints, I'll probably make an 80" screen (biggest I can accomodate) with the one I like best.

Why play? Do you want to know more? The answers are already here and waiting for you to but make a request.

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

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #470 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 12:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:


Originally posted by MississippiMan
But ME hit with 1600 Lumens or more exhibits none of the failing points you've mentioned here.

...

Screen shots would have been nice. What are ya hidin'?
...

(in reply to my statement that I bumped up the brightness level when watching the ME screen)
Screwed up the Black levels doing that, I bet



- I was using a 1200 lumen projector onto a 55" screen. This is quite bright. Brighter than a 1600 lumen projector unto a 100" screen.

- No digital camera, no screen shots.

- When leaving the brightness settings the same on the two screens, the ME was too dark. I could see there was more detail, but it was black-crushed. I had to increase the brightness setting to get it back closer to AVIA standards.

I will be comparing them again. The ME screen had only dried for 4 hours before the comparison. Perhaps it will change a bit over the next day or two.

For those reading this thread and wondering about the base color of Misty Evening - As reported several times it is a very light mixture of Thalo Green and Lamp Black. Thalo Green is a color that is made from a mixture of green and blue, roughly 75% Green and 25% blue. If the paint had only Thalo green in ME quantities, it would be a very, very light blue green. If only Lamp Black were added, in the same quanity as found in ME, the result would be a light gray, a gray that would be stronger than the blue green above.

Thus Misty Evening is a light color that is predominantly gray but with a hint of blue green.

Glidden's "Cloud Nine" is a lighter version, using less Thalo Green and Lamp Black, of the same color. If you want to use the same gray levels but without the blue green tint, then you can try "Universal Gray" which is equivalent to ME, or "Snowfield" equivalent to "Cloud Nine."
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #471 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 09:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Here is a crude attempt to take a couple of screenshots which show the color alterating effect of Misty Evening. I borrowed a camera from my neighbor and the pictures are not absolutely true to what I see on the screen, but they are relatively close.

What I did was to line up the Glidden color strips against my white Parkland screen and then shoot a couple of scenes that had uniform color and lighting across the swatches. On the left is the swatch that has Misty Evening on the 2nd from the top. On the right is a color strip with only grays, going from the very light gray "Snowfield" and then to "Universal Gray" as the 2nd from the top.

Note that against the sand background, the grays simply make the color darker. But the ME color strip alters the color to more gray tone.

My wife came in as I took the pictures and I asked her to look at the screen and describe the effect she saw in the color strips. She said that the one on the left (ME) was gray while the one on the right was brown/beige. With the sandy/beige scene overlaid on the color strips, what she was describing was correct. The ME strip turned the color grayish, while the gray strips simply made the sandy/beige darker, hence her perception of them being brown (because the scene was brown).

The second shot is of a coral-type colored wall. Again the gray paints perserve the color and make it progressively darker moving down the color strip. However the ME strip alters the coral color with a slight purplish tint.

As I stated above, projecting on the ME screen alters all screen colors, but some of them in a more noticable way than others. And unsurprisingly, it alters them in a very predictable way - when a blue green is added to gray, you would expect beiges to move toward gray, reds to move towards purple, and blues & greens to be more pronounced and this is exactly what happens.
LL
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #472 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 09:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
And here is the coral wall picture
LL
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #473 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 10:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Here's another picture of the coral wall, with my ME screen sitting to the left of my Parkland. Again there is a bit of a purplish cast to the wall on the ME painted screen. It isn't just darker.

Also, if you look carefully at the whites, you will notice that they have a very slight blue'ish cast on the ME screen.
LL
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #474 of 918 Old 12-27-2003, 10:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
And another shot of sand, with some sky included. The sand is grayer and the sky is bluer, along with both also being darker than the matte white screen. Again the ME painted screen is on the left side of the picture.
LL
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #475 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 09:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 15,246
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Tom,

All this is very old news. Is there a point your trying to remake? I say "remake" because all this has been stated, and restated many times before. By the sheer numbers of posts your record shows, I cannot but think that your efforts on AVS have been unselfishly directed at disseminating information & helping others, (...NO ONE could could have that many 'questions'!!!) ...so redundancy probably isn't your norm.

ME isn't a choice to be made by those having viable alternatives.

Many people cannot acquire Parkland, or any of the very few materials out there that can accept an images directly and exhibit well rounded results.

Even Parkland is a "Make Do" for many who cannot afford a screen. Many of these people cannot fathom picking up a roller. Many are truly so lazy and cheap, they expect not just a workable, but the "Most Excellent" solution to just fall into their Lap, and for under $25.00.

I don't know about you, and everyone else on AVS, but I myself, and a few others LOVE these people. Their unreasonable demands and expectations are the fuel that drives our engines of creativity and experimentation.

I was a detractor of ME from the moment I saw the first Screen Shots posted by CMRA. I could myself easily discern most of the detrimental aspects it presented. Many others obviously could not because my dissenting posts were effectively drowned by the sheer weight of the number of effusive, almost gushing posts by AVS'er who rushed out and got a quart of ME, rolled it on a wall, and sat back and enjoyed the results.

The tie in was that the same people also owned the very least expensive PJs out there. X1's, Z1's, Panny 300s, and their ilk. And all of those suffered from the double whammy of having poor Contrast ratios and low lumens. That a tough combo to work against when trying to deliver a excellent image up to snuff with Home Theater standards.

Parkland or any smooth, flat or matte white surface will always deliver more accurate "bright or light" colors. But they do little or nothing to augment darker colors, blacks & greys, and the subtle shade that lie in between. In fact, overt brightness washes out those very components.
That's why some paint their Parkland grey. Or (gasp!) with ME.

ME assists the darker realm of colors in their duties. It has been noted quite often that this is at the expense of the crispness of the whites, as well as producing bluish overtones in some colors.

ME has generated a lot of criticism on the merit that so many who have spent so much more money on conventional wisdom are incensed at all the hype satisfied ME users have posted about it. The same can be said of parkland owners. They catch a lot of flack from uppity PJ Heads as well. That's only natural, for tasting sour grapes is a decidedly human trait. What is a little more trite is that most of that criticism comes also from those who resent all the happiness coming from those people, and its rooted in the realization that they got so happy for so much less money spent.

Back to ME & me.

I started out almost immediately to adjust the ME recipe. I lightened the Grey, eased up a bit on the Thallo Green, added Red Oxide. All those changes worked their different magic. But all had their specific issues as well. I went back quickly to my old tricks of using Greys coated with translucent white paints, (Goo and other alternatives ) I painted both the front AND back of Parkland. Something you should consider. ME on the back of Parkland not only prevents light bleed through, the combination of non-reflected light from the darker rear coating, and reflected light from the front surface is on the order of twice the performance value you get from Parkland alone. Now THAT would be a great subject for you to post some results on. Would you consider that a blending of both elements just might be ideal? It certainly comes in cheap!

I guess I'm just trying to fathom why this subject is being expounded upon once again.

Simply put, if someone cannot acquire Parkland, and has a wall, he could do much worse than by painting it with ME, a derivative thereof, any light Grey as you were suggesting, a Goo product, or just Matte White. And they should be happy.

Simply put, if someone can acquire Parkland, and wants to build a Frame, or mount it on a flat surface, and use it exclusively as it is, they should happy too.

Unless of course, someone comes along to point out why either of them shouldn't be happy. This seems to be the express intent of your thread, which would be, (...and really still is...) Ok, excepting it is redundant information and has been posted previously in posts way to numerous to count. Why the focus on ME as opposed to Parkland? Strictly because of what you see in the color abnormalities/ I could understand that from a PJ Head who owns a High End PJ and a GreyHawk screen. What is your motive?

You could help by clarifying the intended purpose of your posts.

To warn others of ME's deficiencies?
To expound on Parkland's qualities?
To reach 3000 posts before New Years?

Which one of these?

I have moved on to projects that demand considerably more attention and investment that Parkland, painted or otherwise. And then on to other ideas that go beyond anything else out there.

They all cost a lot more money than ME or Parkland, but still considerably less than any good Mfg. Screen. But the 'time & cost involvement' factor will still rule out many from their consideration, leaving simple 'one coat' paints and Parkland, Do-Able, and other sheet materials as the only affordable alternatives left to those who spend a little money to get the BIG picture, then feel they must waffle on spending as least as much for a screen as they did for their PJ.

And who can blame 'em.

I'm not sayin that threads like yours do not serve their purpose, only that your thread's purpose has already been served up. Many times.

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

http://www.invisiblestereo.com
MississippiMan is offline  
post #476 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 10:02 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by CMRA
I too have read the results on silver. I have only experimented with silver fabric an the results were 'unwatchable'. My silver experiment did nothing to enhance black level detail, produced sparklies, enhanced the screen door effect, and magnified DVD artifacts. I obviously tested the 'wrong' silver.
Flat white matte is the easiest to work with and color correct for. However, it's this new gray finish I'm most excited about. I do have to adjust for the loss of color saturation and whites are slightly compressed. This new gray has four significant advantages: Reduces visable artifacts, deminishes the screen door effect, enhances the blacks and controls the amount of light reflected into my room and back on to the screen.
In the white vs gray vs silver war, so far it's the gray that delivers the most satisfying viewing experience for me. Other projectors in other environments may produce completely different results.
When viewing 2.35 to 1 dvds the 100" vs 80" screen at 12 feet does indeed have impact.

Fellow posters: This is a quote from me on page ONE (post #7) of this thread. ME is not the end-all in painted screen design, nor was it touted to be. Many, including myself, have found it to be a viable low cost screen solution with some rather redeeming characteristics. As such, it still holds true today as then: "A better grey screen". I don't recall anyone complaining when I posted this screen shot.
LL
CMRA is offline  
post #477 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 01:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
1Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 2,716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by MississippiMan
Even Parkland is a "Make Do" for many who cannot afford a screen. Many of these people cannot fathom picking up a roller. Many are truly so lazy and cheap, they expect not just a workable, but the "Most Excellent" solution to just fall into their Lap, and for under $25.00.

LOL... that was me not too long ago.
1Time is offline  
post #478 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 03:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:


Originally posted by MississippiMan


I painted both the front AND back of Parkland. Something you should consider.

I guess I'm just trying to fathom why this subject is being expounded upon once again.

What is your motive?

You could help by clarifying the intended purpose of your posts.

The answer is an easy one, to your rather remarkable question. The reason to my posting the screenshots with some explanatory text was in direct response to your own reply to my first post on this topic wherein I made some points and you asked for screen shots. That was the sole reason.

If ME makes some people happy, I have no problem with that at all. The only person who needs to be happy is the person watching it. If that is achieved with ME, Goo, Steward, Parkland, or a sheet of cardboard then so be it.

As to painting the back of my Parkland: After reading several posts of people claiming signficant results from altering the back side of Parkland, I played around with several alterations. I put mirrors behind it. Flat black construction paper. White and red construction paper. I put all of these behind different parts of the screen at the same time. None of them made even the slightest, faintest difference to the screen image. Then I did paint some squares on the back using some spare paint lying around the house. Some blue, black and yellow. Again, not the slightest change to the screen image.

I have three Parkland screens of varying sizes. One is mounted against a silver mirrory finished insulation, another against a yellow backing, and the third with brown pegboard (naturally with some holes in it). In extensive side-by-side comparisons, I find no difference in the three screens. So I really don't have any idea of what people are claiming to see from altering the back side of a sheet of Parkland.

I like testing claims and reporting in the most objective way that I can. I own over $400 of audio test gear that I picked up solely to enable me to put a lot of audio claims to tests.
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
post #479 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 03:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by Tom_Bombadil


I like testing claims and reporting in the most objective way that I can. I own over $400 of audio test gear that I picked up solely to enable me to put a lot of audio claims to tests.

Tom,
Thank you for your insight and objectivity. We all must recognize just as there are no perfect projectors, there are no perfect screen solutions either. In the end, much goes the the way of individual viewing habits, preferences, and equipment. And if it could all come together, what price glory?
CMRA is offline  
post #480 of 918 Old 12-28-2003, 06:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom_Bombadil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Old Forest
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
CMRA,

I agree completely. There are no perfect solutions. And it does come down to preferences. Just like in audio, there are multiple high-end speakers that cost $30K and way over per pair (not per 5.1 system) and none are perfect and it also comes down to preferences.

I also enjoy your and others exploration of these things. Very interesting. Note that I did not criticize any of these efforts and was only reporting upon what I found in a comparison of ME (and those other little paint dabs) vs matte white. Certainly matte white is not nirvana for all, but it is a good comparison standard.

Now that I have a panel that can be painted and repainted, along with a near full quart of ME, I may continue to play with it a bit. I hadn't used a gray screen before and I did enjoy some aspects of the change in contrast and black levels. Will probably pick up a quart of the "Snowfield" and may try such things as a mix of 2 parts Snowfield and 1 part Misty Evening. This will lighten the grays by somewhere around 30-40% and lighten the Thalo Green affect by 67%. As it will be the same paint base and induce no new pigments, there shouldn't be any odd side effects from mixing the colors. I'll call it SF2ME and see how it looks. From my examination of the ME screen and the paint samples, I think I would like this much better than just ME.

But I will not get into this hobby to the extent that you and others have done. I can see where that would be fun and informative, but don't have the time or space for it. However I look forward to your discoveries.
Tom_Bombadil is offline  
Reply DIY Screen Section



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