RS-MMMaxx questions - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 540 Old 12-12-2005, 05:55 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
Here's the latest version of the RS-MMMaxx-LL that I copied from PB's post in another thread:

16 oz. - Behr Ultra Pure White Flat Exterior (HD) $10
8 oz. - Behr Deep Base Flat Exterior (HD) $9
16 oz. - Delta Ceramcoat Pearl #02601 (Michaels) $8
8 oz. - Delta Ceramcoat Metallic Silver #02603 (Michaels) $4
10 oz. Minwax Polycrylic Satin Finish (HD) $14
6 oz. Distilled or Tap Water

I'd like to come up with a test panel of this for comparison with my others, but I have questions I'd like answered before attempting this (again).

My questions:
1. Can this version be rolled?
2. If not, what is the version that can be rolled?
3. When rolling, how many coats should be rolled if using an UPW gloss base?
4. And when rolling, how much of a difference should one expect to see between it rolled over UPW gloss versus rolling additional coats of it over a flat white base?
5. One more, how much of a difference should one expect to see between the sprayed mix versus it rolled over an UPW gloss base?

Thanks
1Time is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 08:18 AM
Member
 
Al O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Inverness,FL.USA
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
maxx- How can I roll it right on my WALL, paint cannot be wet it will roll down? Thanks
Al O is offline  
post #93 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 08:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
when it's rolled on... it looks 'wet and shiny' which is much different from 'wet and runny' which is what you are referring to.
if it's 'runny' than you've overloaded your roller and not spread the paint evenly using your roller pan board.

this mix will work just fine on a wall. just make sure your wall is sanded smooth and primed with UPW gloss as your basecoat.

the same way (techniques) that you use to roll a standard drywall... are the same steps you'll employ here.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #94 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 08:45 AM
Member
 
Al O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Inverness,FL.USA
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
maxx- Thank you, I will use your updated RS-MaxxMudd regular version, it will be in my living room.
Al O is offline  
post #95 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 07:05 PM
Member
 
mawst95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone tried rolling the BF mix on a mirror? Does it need to be primed first or sanded?
mawst95 is offline  
post #96 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 07:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
mawst95,

mm posted that he rolled the BF mix on a mirror in indianapolis using a 3/16inch foam roller and it worked out very well.

you shouldn't prime it first. and you also shouldn't sand it either.

the first coat should be fairly thin and a little bit drier... although not a straight dry roll. this coat is similiar to a 'frost' coat. the mirror can still be seen after this coat.

for the 2nd coat should be similiar to the 1st but use a little more paint this time. the mirror should be virtually gone.

the 3rd coat you should roll like a standard drywall... a medium 'wet & shiney' coat. the mirror is completely covered.

-maxx
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #97 of 540 Old 12-13-2005, 07:29 PM
Newbie
 
brian mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
-maxx

I've got all my supplies now to spray a screen, plexi, paint, gun. I was planning on painting the back side with the silver metallic. How many coats do you think I'll need, and how far does that paint go? Will one 8oz bottle be enough for a 100" screen. Also, will I need to thin it? Thanks
Brian
brian mc is offline  
post #98 of 540 Old 12-14-2005, 01:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Brain,

I'd take one 8oz bottle of Delta SM and one 8oz bottle of Pearl and mix it with 8oz of Polycrylic.
that'll give about 24oz of mix for your backside basecoat... which should be enough for 2 solid coats.
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #99 of 540 Old 12-14-2005, 06:49 AM
Member
 
subyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 158
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I've recently finished my 120" maxxmuddLL screen directly on the wall...I haven't had a chance to test it as I'm waiting for my ae900 to arrive. I hve a completely light controlled basement so I went LL even though I have enough lumnes with the 900. The only Issue I had was I was following one of your previous posts on the whole process and in it you said to wetsand the second coat of UPW gloss before applying the first coat of mix. I have since found where you have said not to wetsand the second base coat. Will I lose much from having sanded my gloss coat? I just gave it a light sanding except a couple paces where I found a little roller debris and had to sand a little harder to smooth it out...hopefully I won't get a dull spot where I did this. By the way, thanks for all the great posts...you helped me out greatly with deciding which route to go for my screen.

(3) JTR Noesis 212HT (LCR)
(2) JTR Single 8 (wides)
(2) JTR Slanted 8 (sides)
(2) DIY Eminence 10" coax (rear Surrounds)
(2) JTR Orbit Shifters
(2) Mach5 UXL-18's sealed
(2) Soundsplinter 15's sealed
Speakers powered by 6 crown xls 1500's
UXL's powered by Peavey IPR-7500

My theater:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
subyguy is offline  
post #100 of 540 Old 12-14-2005, 07:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
subyguy,

you should be fine... and it definitely won't be noticeable. so enjoy your new screen with any reservations.

but to clarify for others sake. i'm not big on wet sanding latex. however, if you choose to sand after your 2nd coat of UPW because the finish is not as smooth as you'd like it to be... then i personally would litely hand sand it. mm on the other hand... would likely tell you to wetsand it. it's merely a preference in technique and likely won't have any difference if a smooth screen is the end result.

glad to help.

-maxx
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #101 of 540 Old 12-15-2005, 09:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
RodK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Hey PB, a quick question. I have a Panny 700u mounted 19' from the screen in a 12' X 20' room, screen size is 106" diag. The room is light controlled with 4 pot lights on a dimmer. I would like to have the lights partially on sometimes for sports viewing. Would you recommend the regular formi\\ula or the low light ?

RodK is offline  
post #102 of 540 Old 12-16-2005, 01:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
RodK,

you definitely want to use the regular formula.
this mix should give you something you'll be happy with for both situations...

-maxx
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #103 of 540 Old 12-16-2005, 01:53 AM
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
PB,

As I'm watching you tailor these RS-MMMaxx mixes according to the presence and/or absence of ambient light, I'm wondering how much you facter in the brightness of the projector? For example, my Optoma H57 projector is considerably brighter than my Optoma H31 and so I would think the LL version would be best for my H31 with controlled lighting. However, would you recommend the same LL version for use with my H57 in the same controlled lighting or would you recommend a more ambient light resistant version?

Thanks
1Time is offline  
post #104 of 540 Old 12-16-2005, 10:53 AM
Member
 
jynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Anchorage AK
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So what would you suggest for a Pany 900 in a small (12.5' by 13.5') mostly light controlled room with dark red walls (and a white celling for now). I should probably say that I think the projector is very bright and would like to tone it down a bit.
jynx is offline  
post #105 of 540 Old 12-16-2005, 11:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pb_maxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
jynx,

...with such a small room and a much smaller throw distance... since you're looking to tone things down a bit...
for you, i'd definitely recommend the regular rs-mmmaxx mix that i posted on this thread early today...
the same one i recommended to RodK.

-maxx
pb_maxxx is offline  
post #106 of 540 Old 12-17-2005, 06:35 PM
Member
 
inukshuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
pb_maxxx
first, thanks again for your patient replies to all these questions

second, do i have this right ?

your formula over a UPW gloss basecoat provides a fair amount of reflection (from the gloss) whereas mm's formula gives even greater reflection as it is over a mirror

your formula eliminates the need for a mirror because of a) the reflection of the high gloss basecoat and b) the incorporation of silver metallic into your formula

would it make sense to apply your formula over a basecoat of silver metallic to achieve the best of both...or is the combination of silver metallic and high gloss base enough to come so close to mm's that it's not really necessary?

"If I'm curt, then I apologize"
inukshuk is offline  
post #107 of 540 Old 12-17-2005, 08:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
PatrickGSR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
so what about my 4805 with a throw distance of only about 9 feet? Regular mix or LL mix? Right now I'm using the lower lumen setting on the projector with just a white sheet of paper taped on the wall and it doesn't look all that bad to me (although I know a real screen will be better).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
PatrickGSR94 is offline  
post #108 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 09:55 AM
Member
 
inukshuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


now with respect to what i'd do if i didn't have a mirror or a spray gun to work with...

best option...
use an 1/8" acrylic sheet... roll the backside with 2 coats of a 2:1 mix of Delta SM & Minwax Polycrylic...
and the front side with 3 coats of maxxmudd.

2nd best option (if i had no acrylic sheet)...
use a durotherm or doable board... 2 coats of the basecoat i proposed above... followed by 3 coats of maxxmudd.

otherwise, the easiest option of all, which requires no basecoat of any kind...
use a durotherm, doable, or white MDF board... followed by 3 coats maxxmudd.

very clear explanation...i am tempted to try all three !...i think i will look at the price of 1/8 acrylic (i.e plexiglass..correct?) though i kind of feel that if i am going to go for the acrylic, i might as well try to just get an acrylic mirror and try mm...i guess i was really struck by the punchiness of his images....there is a local place here on the island called industrial paint and plastics and i think they will have most of the stuff i need....thanks again

"If I'm curt, then I apologize"
inukshuk is offline  
post #109 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 10:26 AM
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 inukshuk View Post

... i might as well try to just get an acrylic mirror and try mm...i guess i was really struck by the punchiness of his images....

MM (MMud or Mississippi Mud) is no longer recommended as being superior to the use of MaxxMudd in any like application.

This is an example of why one's interpretation of screen shots should not be used solely to determine what DIY screen solution to use. Screen shots are valuable in showing some differences between screen applications, but they certainly do not show every aspect of what one sees in person. Too often it seems screen shots are very good at showing one's ability to take and post quality photos. In some ways screen shots can be valuable and helpful to the DIY'er in determining differences in various DIY screen applications. I'd like to write more on this some day to elaborate.

Merry Christmas to all...
1Time is offline  
post #110 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 11:02 AM
Member
 
inukshuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


MM (MMud or Mississippi Mud) is no longer recommended as being superior to the use of MaxxMudd in any like application.

This is an example of why one's interpretation of screen shots should not be used solely to determine what DIY screen solution to use. Screen shots are valuable in showing some differences between screen applications, but they certainly do not show every aspect of what one sees in person. Too often it seems screen shots are very good at showing one's ability to take and post quality photos. In some ways screen shots can be valuable and helpful to the DIY'er in determining differences in various DIY screen applications. I'd like to write more on this some day to elaborate.

1Time...very helpful post

you are certainly correct, there is nothing even close to a baseline or reference point for screen shots, i think we see what we want to see often

it seemed to me the mm first set of screen shots were exceptionally rich in color and bright (which my old eyes appreciate more and more)

on the other hand i live in a condo and have no real tools to do this stuff so simple and cheap is fine with me

are you saying that plain old UPW Gloss on a melamine board or something is your favorite?

also, my original plan was to buy a couple of sheets of foamcore (used in framing) and try a different mix on each side...will foamcore work as a surface??

"If I'm curt, then I apologize"
inukshuk is offline  
post #111 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 11:20 AM
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
Although UPW eggshell was my favorite when I used my Optoma H31, it no longer is my favorite since I'm now using an Optoma H57. I hope to update and add photos and info in my gallery soon. I'm now in the process of determining a favorite of these new gray paints for use with my Optoma H57, which is too bright for use with a white screen (without use of a neutral density filter). That is not to say what I would choose for my H57 and lighting conditions would be best for your projector and lighting conditions. I don't know how well foamcore would work. I primarily roll paint on DoAble boards. I will leave it up to pb_maxxx to answer your questions about his mix from here on. Hope you find a DIY paint solution you will like.

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

A correction to my previous post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Time View Post

MM (MMud or Mississippi Mud) is no longer recommended as being superior to the use of MaxxMudd in any like application.

I should have said "is not recommended" since MM never was recommended as being superior to the use of MaxxMudd in any like application.
1Time is offline  
post #112 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 11:33 AM
Member
 
inukshuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
ii have an optoma h31 which i will return this week (non-stop rainbows but in other respects a great projector) and i will be buying a panny 900

i was told at the art supply store that foamcore was definitely paintable...i like the idea that they are very light

i will start with the regular version of maxx over UPW on either foamcore or doable board

let us know how your gray paint experiments go

"If I'm curt, then I apologize"
inukshuk is offline  
post #113 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 11:36 AM
Senior Member
 
BlakeN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am currently waiting for my 2nd coat of RS-.. ect to dry and I thought I would post some initial thoughts about painting this up while its all fresh in my head. Let me preface this by saying I am a bit of a perfectionist about this kind of thing so some of this might seam a bit anal.

So far this has been my application process.

2 coats Pittsburgh white latex primer/sealer
wet sand with fine/medium sanding sponge.

I used pittsburgh because I feel its a superior product to behr and I just happened to have some laying around. A downside, however, is that this stuff dries hard, rock hard. It laughed at my sanding sponge for about 30 minutes but I finally got it very smooth. An upside is that there's no way you're going to gouge this stuff with a sponge.

2 coats behr upw high gloss
wet sanding with the same sponge. Even though this was pretty smooth to start with my roller started to shed on the 2nd coat so I had to sand all the fibers out.

1 more coat upw high gloss.

I mixed the RS-M... This stuff is thin. pb and mm have both mentioned it but I want to tell all the people that might thing they messed up that its VERY thin. I followed the instructions to the t using a measuring bucket and a squirrel cage mixer. I would say its a little thicker then tomato soup.

I layed on a coat with a 1/4th mohair "non-shedding" roller. I used a rolling pan and a piece of drywall that was already coated in white primer to make sure that I hadn't over loaded the roller and it was evenly distributed. I used full slow stokes. The first thing I noticed was it didn't seem to want to stick to the gloss. What I realised after a few minutes of inspection was that it just wasn't getting into all the very small valleys in the surface. Even though my surface was pretty smooth at this point there was still some texture. I also noticed that it streaks pretty easily or so it seamed wet. What I ended up doing was rolling until my roller was out of paint and then going over the area I just rolled very lightly to even it all out. My paint also had a lot of air in it. I just couldn't get it out with the mixer so there were quite a few bubbles on my wall as I painted. This was not a problem. This mix is so thin that 95% of the bubbles popped on their own and when I went over the wet paint a 2nd time all the bubbles were taken care of.

Pb has said this numerous times but the paint WILL even out as it dries. I was using a 500w painters light and after the first coat I could still see some streaking but after 60 minutes of drying (fan assisted) the paint looked very even.

I will report back with more information in a while. Its time to get some food
BlakeN is offline  
post #114 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 02:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
PatrickGSR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Blake,

are you painting this on some kind of board laying flat? Or are you painting directly onto a wall?

My main concern is if the mmmaxx formula is as thin as you describe, I might have a problem with runs when painting on a vertical surface.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
PatrickGSR94 is offline  
post #115 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 03:10 PM
Senior Member
 
BlakeN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am painting on the wall. Runs are not a problem when rolling only when spraying. Just make sure you get the paint on the roller evenly by either using 2 paint trays or a spare piece of drywall.

After two coats and a few hours of fan drying everything looks great. The only thing I have to compare it to is the flat primer I was looking at before but IMHO I couldn't have asked for anything better.

One of my biggest concerns was streaking and color inconstancy. After watching a few hours I have not been able to pick out any streaks. Even where I know there is a blemish in the wall (I noticed a few divots when painting one of which should have been filled) I can not see them during viewing even when I am looking right at them.

This project was well worth the time, effort, and money. Thanks to PB, MM and any other that have helped contribute to the DIY effort. If you're ever in Des Moines Iowa I owe you both a beer and a cigar.
BlakeN is offline  
post #116 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 03:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
PatrickGSR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
awesome... yeah I'm using a white sheet of paper out of our plotter at work, taped up on the wall so I'm sure a real painted screen will look awesome.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
PatrickGSR94 is offline  
post #117 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 05:33 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Time View Post

MM (MMud or Mississippi Mud) is no longer recommended as being superior to the use of MaxxMudd in any like application.


MMud is still far more accurate overall than RS-MaxxMudd as far as delivering an accurate showing of the PJs "exact" abilities. RS-Maxx Mudd DOES help a PJ perform better than it otherwise would under specific, or broader situations where blacker blacks are the singular most important aspect of a DIY'ers desires. Mixes like RS-MaxxMudd and BFLF, as well as any "non-White" variety will ALWAYS require some color adjustment.....either through the PJ's Color Menu, or the end user's perception of what looks best (good to him) The use of MMud on a prepared Board or Mirror has been compared not just favorably, but at the least equal to the performance of a StudioTek 130, a industry reference standard. MMud isn't highly sought after these days because so many now want mucho contrast enhancement, and/or ambient light capabilities. (thanks to the initial previous "efforts" that predate anything current...)


This is an example of why one's interpretation of screen shots should not be used solely to determine what DIY screen solution to use.


That's mostly baloney. Repeated over and over, and it still holds no wieght. You were wrong with your first statement, because you too broadly worded it. Now, all you are doing 1Time is using a single statement to try to redredge up an old battle or make a wholly unfounded point unchallenged. So I'll oblige by pointing out how narrow minded your arguement really is.

Even without constantly using "controls" and "other examples" beside a particular screen, there still remains a constant. The images don't just happen to look different, or better. In virtually ALL the recent screenshots posted on this forum, none that are not from a MMud/Mirror application can be seen to consistantly excell over shots taken from many different sized MMud/LF screens, from many different types of PJs, and in many varied lighted conditions short of "High Ambient Light". It's a fact. Much controversy is always generated by those who themselves DO NOT even try to attempt taking screenies, and if they do, and do so without the benefit of a similar application to MMud w/wo LF to do so with, the end result is another tirade about how screenies are irrelevent. And that is of course fodder for the others who love to argue and disrupt the flow of info and advice.


Screen shots are valuable in showing some differences between screen applications, but they certainly do not show every aspect of what one sees in person. Too often it seems screen shots are very good at showing one's ability to take and post quality photos.

Primaily more Oscar Mayer discards. Unless you are talking about using a $5 Point & Shoot. Or someone who is manipulating images. Few on this Forum who have gone so far as to make any type of screen, then bother to take and post shots, can be considered so enept at understanding how to use a Camera. Their results reflect what their cameras can "See" so if it looks bad when "shot" , it might only be becuase the eye can blend it all together and accept the overall image, but the Camera picks up all the crap as well as the good, showing hotspotting the eye fails to see, or showing how dim the image is so that the Camera cannot expose itself correctly. If lighting tricks or special devices were in play, then yes, that would be reason for doubt or dismissal, but they are not. Post processing? I don't think anybody I can remeber has ever tried such in a long time, and when they did, it was either very obvious, or was mentioned that such occured for a specific purpose.

I'm no professional Photog. I seldom use a tripod. I use a 4 year old dinosaur of a Digicam with a permanantly spotted lens. I point and shoot from every angle, every distance. All on Auto. I take shots that come from a very wide variety of PJs, and they all show consistantly the same qualites, differing only in some small degree in Color, Brightness, or Resolution, characteristics prevalent to the PJ being used, not to the screen or the camera, which remains the same. Location after location. That they all look so good has led me to beleive that the screen is the deciding factor.

If the light AND color are being shown in balance and with uniformity across the entire screen, results are always far better than those of other examples where something is lost, or too much or not enough is/has been added to the equation. We have various levels of RS-MaxxxMud, BFLF, even MMud. SilverScreen can come adultrated with any number of End User tweaks. A poorly rolled UPW Flat or Eggshell finish can affect the end results. But nothing you can do with a simple camera set on auto can take a lousy looking image and make it magically into something that stirs someone's imagination and DIY desires. If it isn't good, it won't stand up to the "Screenie" test.

This I have seen countless times myself, in my own work, and is exactly how I do in fact judge on how well a particualr application is doing it's job. I throw this back at you. The Eyes can play tricks on you. Cameras are consistant in as much as if you take even a little bit of care, they will return to you something that you can remeber as being damnable close to what you saw on screen.

It is a fact, when a really good DIY screen app is shown, the comments by the Poster runs almost to: "The pics don't do my screen justice!" not, "The pics look better than my screen does in real life."

Can ANYBODY show me otherwise? I think not.

But this almost always gets twisted around backwards by those who seem to be unable or unwilling to take screenies. Or who have an agenda of trying to discredit others' efforts to get the word out they have something worthwhile to consider.

No, instead, to be valid and relevant, EVERYBODY must post a screenie that has a control element in it, or several different test boards. EVERYONE must adhere to the whims of a few who state that without such a individulized effort, , no screenie is to be considered accurate enough to judge anything essential thereby.

It is a telling fact that the increase in the quality of images being produced of DIY screens has improved so very much, that many are getting great photo results easily. Yes, some do still have to figure out a few basic methods, avoid a few common mistakes, but if they fail to do so, their own poor results do no negate the overall value of all the other screenshots that are taken with more care as to correct proceedure. Too bad that a thread that addresses such an instructional always draws people to come on and decry the whole idea as worthless, or in the least, good only for only very basic assumptions. Why? They say it is to prevent people from getting carried away or misled by screenies, and go a particular route for that reason alone.

That's so lame. I can relate that no one has ever told me they were going to spend upwards of $200.00+ on one of my DIY applications solely on the basis of my posted screenies. And when it did occur, I always consul for prudence and info, not a "kneeJerk." Did those screenies grab thier attention? Did they play a strong role in the decision making process? Certainly. Why? Because 'virtually' no one else's screenies they could find could compare, and there was more visual quality being shown via those screenies than they had ever seen. Obviously more. That bothers some people greatly, to here such commitment and purpose be stated by someone who heretofore had no experience in such matters.

Sadly, nothing can be done for the few who do in fact read, veiw, then jump without posting or emailing for advice. They must face the trials, rigors, and potential failures/vioctories alone. Some do in fact prefer it that way. But usually, if they fail, it's not their fault.

That has always been an issue with all things DIY, not just DIY Screens

So now, instead, some feel the Newbee must be protected from such unwise "hasty and misguided" thinking and assumptions, unless the "protectors" themselves are recomending without hesitation their own favorite alternative. Then suddenly, they can make all sort of deffinative claims and statements, and their word is to be then taken for granted, of course. Imagine that?

I've taken my screen shots in the company of other forum Members, and those members have vouchsafed for their accuracy and how they were taken. I take screenshots because it is a pleasurable thing to capture and go back to to reveiw one's work when it resides in a Home not their own.

And even more pleasuable to get some outside plaudits for such work. But most of all, to inspire others to go out and attempt the same.

That is why I, and CMRA and a few others before us started taking the time to post up such examples. To generate excitement and enthusiasium. To get fence sitting people to "Jump in and swim". If UPW-Eggshell, or so very many other paints or materials had that ability to accomplish the same amount of excitement via a photo, it would already be up on the Board. Parkland or Doable can make some commit simply because they are cheap and easy. But they are most certainly both inferior 'by themselves' in almost any/every way to any number of properly done, more complex DIY Paint applications placed on a wood board. "One Can Paint" solutions are good primarily for not discouraging the lazy or poor, or enept. If I/we all have any responsibility to newcomers, it's to steer them toward the BEST POSSIBLE application we can, and that thier own ability or budget can accomodate, not just an easy "make do". But when an Author has a dedicated thread, or asks for specific advice, they should not be subjected to all the crap that those with no other interest but to dissuade and / or dismiss the suggestions or advice of those who created the thread, or responded by posting such requested info.

All to often, threads on DIY Screens become nothing but an opportunity for some to disrupt or decry. No courtesy is given an Author to remain on topic. Some feel free to post up contrary statements to what was asked for, or provided, simply because they can do so, not because it's proper or right. Much the same can be said of the constant harping about promotion, when it cannot be said that anywhere, or that anyone on AVS has been approached in such a manner that the effort was nothing if not a "helping Hand", instead of a grab for profit. No, they use rules that are obviously disreguarded on every other Forum with impunity to weild as a bludgeon against the popular efforts by those who must attempt to now straddle the fence between providing help and assistance to others, and maintain some simbalence of security and future for themselves.

Opinions, unsolicitated, are on this particualr Forum, all too often really just someone baiting others for a response. Also a violation of Forum rules.
Also grossly and conveinly ignored by both members and the Mods.

All it really amounts to is another weapon in the arsenal of the disaffected. That the Forum Mods choose to look so closely so often in this direction instead of throughout the entirety of AVS only shows that those people involved in bringing complaints to the DIY Screen Mods work harder at thier own efforts to disrupt than the majority of AVS members do to demand that the Mods be more even handed and less quick to make judgements based on a few specific reoccuring individual complaintants. They seem to be enjoying what influance they wield, but it cannot last if more members complain about what has been lost

Of course, we/I might have given their arguements more weight by deciding to keep one Application in the Private domain, but the actions and motives, as well as the attitues behind the grabbing for both info and credit for other's work has shown that their's is a desperate and selfish trend toward thinking, a trend that will eventually drive more people away than attract to stay.



In some ways screen shots can be valuable and helpful to the DIY'er in determining differences in various DIY screen applications. I'd like to write more on this some day to elaborate.

I'm sure you would. By that thinking, a statement could be constructed like:

"Screen shots are themselves pretty much useless as a criteria to judge anything by, unless it's a comparison between two or more surfaces simultaniously. Only then, can a difference to consider be accurately adjudged. Never mind that it all is still inaccurate, and does not reflect what the eye sees in person."

That too is just silly Crap, but no more so than the first stated Crap above, something that only serves these purposes; to denigrate and dismiss the work of others, and try to prevent others from getting both excited, and dissuade others' their motivation they obtain from veiwing actual photo renditions by people who take the time to publish such.

Nothing is said at all about how relevent the claims are that are made by those recent participants in the search for ambient light performance who have posted screen shots, comparison based or otherwise. Oh No! Those pics are valid and permissable. Only the "censorship" of the efforts of those who got everyone else started, on the pretext that their posts are nothing but 'promotion' for a application not evenon the market are considered a fair target for thier potshots.

The vast majority of people cannot go view several different screens. Nor can they themselves' strive to produce 3-5 different samples. Instead, they post and PM for specific advice, and if it is given by somebody, that's ok, as long as the "Provider" of such advice isn't too popular or influential.

It's time that everyone on this Forum realize that those who try to consistantly help others do so with the right motives in mind. Those who consistantly argue and disrupt threads, or cause them to be closed by intentionally creating strife do so because that seems to be the ONLY skill they posses, not actually offering up something concrete for a rebuttle by putting their own work up for reveiw. Then, they themselves' might garner some critisium.

1Time, until you do some real shooting of such material yourself, your comments will have to be delegated to those of one who just has an opinion to espousse. Those who read such "opinions" should take them for what they really are. Opinions only.


Merry Christmas to all...

Merry Christmas to you and everyone else as well.


There is a lot of new and neat stuff coming all ya alls' way soon. I haven't died, nor become discouraged in the least. But I have slowed down considerably. Anybody who was promised something by/from me, or that has requested specific help or advice over the last few weeks, please EMAIL me again with a stern reminder. Between being ill, and then playing catch-up with work and with traveling, many of you might of been consigned to the oblivion of being buried under the last 400-600 emails.

I've always tried to be diligent in answering PMs and emails asap, so being so far behind is both troubling and inexcusable to me.

I now have a incoming Email Filter installed that will grab any email addressed to MMan- Mississippiman - or any that come from the AVS "Email" setting, and deposit it into a separate folder for immediate review and attention. I'll also be going back 45 days or so to find what I can, but if your in a hurry, or just don't want to take the chance you'll get overlooked, them "Email" me


MMan


PLEASE NOTE:
I have virtually no space in my AVS PM box left, and many of the incoming PMs must remain during the review process. Many replies are kept to re-issue to those who ask previously addressed questions. Email, or risk being overlooked or your PM being refused due to no PM Box space left.

Now then, who want's to be the first to complain abouth the length of my reply?


To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #118 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 05:45 PM
Member
 
Kridian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
PB_Maxx, MM or anyone who's done the Acrylic Mirror scenario:

First off, I'd gladly take a link to a page that has this info.

Does the mirror need any prep before spraying?

Does the mirror have to be at an angle or straight up when spraying?

And to confirm, I spray down my first coat of UPW and let that dry, then two or three coats of the mix?

Seems like someone on here suggested sanding at the end(?)

-Thanks Oh! Merry Christmas People!
Kridian is offline  
post #119 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 05:54 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kridian View Post

PB_Maxx, MM or anyone who's done the Acrylic Mirror scenario:

First off, I'd gladly take a link to a page that has this info.

Does the mirror need any prep before spraying?

Just have it be clean & Dry.


Does the mirror have to be at an angle or straight up when spraying?

My Mirrors are either at a slight angle if sat upon an "easel", or Flat if pre-applied to a wall (peferred)

And to confirm, I spray down my first coat of UPW and let that dry, then two or three coats of the mix?

That would be UPW-Gloss (Latex enamel) Try to limit yoyrself to two coats, or at most, a third VERY LIGHT finish coat.


Seems like someone on here suggested sanding at the end(?)


Only if needed to reduce texture, or stifle too much reflectivity, OR to reduce the thickness of your final coat. If you select the right MMix and do it all right the first time around, sanding is a thing to be dismissed as unnessecery. The key to getting a good sprayed coat is how thin you can get your mix without it becoming "watery'.


-Thanks Oh! Merry Christmas People!


So very many happy returns to you and yours.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #120 of 540 Old 12-18-2005, 06:13 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
Merry Christmas, MMan.
1Time is offline  
Reply DIY Screen Section

User Tag List

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


Forum Jump: 

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

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