Originally posted by sportster64
Better read the post again MM - I was simply questioning the need to use expensive behr Silver versus what I believe is a cheaper alternative - And re-wind the thread back to my original commits in the thread - Why use the expensive silver as a base - when there are ,,again in my opinion AND experience,, cheaper alternatives to achieve the same results??????
Please MM - stick with answering the LAST sentence!!!
You must of missed it...three times.
Silver & Silver Metallic are two completely different animals.
You were right in stating that mixing Silver with white gets you a grey.
So does mixing lamp Black with white, but that is a dingier grey.
Mixing SM with a Flat white, and it will result in a more reflective surface than without the SM. Add a little Red Oxide, or Thallo Green, or both...and who knows?
The silver metallic "flakes" are what makes the reflectivty become enhanced. Similar properties are what drives the SS, and yet that greatly enhanced reflectivity is what also creates a limited viewing cone by directing too much light straight back to the PJ, just like a flashlight or flashbulb creates a intense reflection when viewed head on into a really reflective surface such as aluminum, or worse, a mirror.
Diluting that effect just to the point where it is under control, and then adding the wide viewing angle aspects of lighter shades applied on smooth surfaces goes a lot further towards creating a good blend of attributes without making to deep a sacrifice in any one direction. A SS is best utilized when you have no other choice, not as the "only Choice" IMO Such a statement shouldn't threaten anyones sensibilities. Simply put, it works, and I have already proven it. Whether it works best of all...I've never dared make that claim. It is now for others such as you, Scoob to confirm, disprove, or ignore as each sees fit.
Too long have 'learned' HT people been stuck in the conventional rut of designing HTs on a long axis. It's merely a status quo thing aggravated by the fact that MFg understandably could produce equipment more suited to that design than to designs were people might actualy sit closer than 10'
That is changing daily.
CMRA knows I'm on his side, and excepting the potential of a noticable SDE effect from his Z1 when viewed 'way' too close, his results verify that you can start to crowd the screen closer than ever before. Use a good DLP and 6' isn't "too close". At that distance, a smaller image still represents a correct viewing aspect ratio, and produces an even brighter and sharper image. And that is what we are all looking for. All undisputable facts. I don't dwell 26 years in the past, either. I prepare for the future...constantly. And the Future lies in adjusting one's thinking for progress and innovation.
I hope the above explanation clears up a few misconceptions on what I said and did not say. And I hope this post is perceived as being, "On Track" for it certainly was meant to be.