Well I do NOT agree.
Originally Posted by tiddler
For those who may have been mislead by recent efforts and some of my conclusions regarding upgrades to the basic FnEasy DIY Painted Screen Solution I feel it is necessary to restate my initial evaluation of this solution compared to the semi-opaque complex metallic mix solutions. First of all I will state that this is not speculation but conclusions based on observations that I have made. I have implemented the more common metallic mixes and also a variation that I developed to be more flexible in lightness of gray or even white.
Those observations you made are not conclusive, nor do the represent results as they can be and are observed in a "Full Sized Screen" format. More on this below.
Given the same lightness of gray an FnEasy screen can compete with a complex semi-opaque metallic mix screen but is much much easier to prepare and apply.
To achieve performance levels beyond either the FnEasy or complex semi-opaque metallic mixes it is necessary to employ a metallic or pearl clear coat. The introduction of a metallic/pearl clear coat does increase gain and contrast while not significantly reducing viewing cone.
That is far too generalized and essentially a false (wrong) conclusion you've made based on very little practical "Real Life" observations. And you assume too much in that you've decided what is "Easy" for others based upon your own preferences and abilities. While they (...your expressed opinions....) may be representative of the opinions of many others, developed after having read such as being stated over and over again repeatedly, for you or anyone else to assume that those others cannot or would not prefer to attempt something else is very much a example of close-mindedness. Test panels are at best a approximation of "expected...hoped for results", not a benchmark to judge other applications as to their effectiveness or comparability. It matters not if you do one or a hundred. For that, you need full sized examples receiving identical content from identical sources, under identical circumstance.
This point has been proven, and was proven long before you began posting anything, so it should, and does remain a "constant". I myself have suffered from being "called out" that the very samples I provided for comparison did not represent effective subject for making accurate judgments, but of course my "samples" were those of lessor applications compared against a full size DIY representation of the application they were being tested against. Mostly just "White" subjects being compared to "advanced" mixes. No matter how it's done, such testing of down-sized samples fall to being very ineffective until they sized reach to at least 25% of the larger surface. Even then, placement within the screen area is another factor that cannot be overlooked as being a potential element in affecting the end results observed.
The ONLY advantage such Top Coats bring is increased gain at the expense of other viewing attributes. "Tunnel Vision" viewing cones are fine for those who can accept them, but ANY screen that has such shows off it's limitations, and it's perchant toward being less than desirable in many instances. A Top Coat was always a "Fix" not a required step. And that "Fix" is needed only when the base Screen App is found wanting. If FnEasy needs a Top Coat to measure up "performance wise" in any way, then your own statements are contradictory. For a DIY screen that turned out to be of less than desired brightness, such can restore a measure of acceptability. But you cannot take it too far.
BTW, Contrast is NOT increased, only the appearance of such because the brightest areas have been given a boost by such Top Coatings. Your not going to increase "actual" Black levels by ramping up brightness. That's impossible. No, at best, if the solution can increase gain in just the right manner, without overdriving the surface into Hot Spotting or Sheening, it can make the blacks appear to be darker in comparison. That's all Brother....no more. To do "more" at the screen level you must have more working for you than just Gray.
What would be more correct would be the following statement.
:FnEasy is a simple to make and apply neutral Gray screen paint solution. It provides excellent results when combined with an appropriately matched PJ and room configuration. It's performance is very competitive in "Image Quality", but it provides no additional Gain, as it's being compiled without the benefit of addition components that allow such to occur. To achieve performance levels beyond what the FnEasy can provide itself, it is necessary to employ a metallic or pearl clear coat. The introduction of a metallic/pearl clear coat does increase gain
You seem to be proclaiming your specific Pearl coat creation as being the only way significant improvements in results can be had, yet you cannot say you have ever seen such employed by anyone in enough full sized practical applications to be able to make such a definitive proclamation. How many have been done? 1? 2? You have done how many yourself? 1? And that wasn't very "Easy" either, was it?
There are too many variables instituted with FnEasy for it to be labeled so "Easy".
Your trying to make it seem to be the "End All" and all it is is "Easy and very Acceptable". C'mon now, all it really is is just old news made better by the use of more precise neutral mixing, and even the Pearl experiments and Top Coats contain no new elements or developments that were not existent and proven long before it's creation. And somehow those developments never lit any raging fires of passion. No. You still must match up the choice of hue to the room/PJ, and it seems to be plain that FnEasy needs a "Boost" to compete with mixes you seem anxious to reduce to a position beneath FnEasy's "Pedestal" status. And you and many others have often stated how no one solution is broad based enough to warrant "Best of the best for virtually any application" status.
Your statements above and below would now seem to be saying otherwise. Your having 5-6 related threads, and posting continually on them about how good something is doesn't make it all come to be so. That FnEasy is an excellent Gray solution that can be easily applied by most anyone is a given, and your efforts to bring it to the forefront of people's attention are commendable, but overstated and overdone.
FnEasy is not only easily implemented but a very effective DIY Painted Screen solution. Don't be dazzled by exotic ingredients or assume that complexity will translate into a perceptible improvement in performance.
A very discrediting statement that seems to be saying you believe that such things are not necessary, and that other would do well not to concern themselves with such ideas and concepts. Yet you determine on the other hand that FNEasy works better at doing what needs to be done if reflective Top Coats are added. Hmmmmm...., and why is that? Because it doesn't contain such assistance within it's basic make-up like other mixes do. And they work great as well at doing what the mixes are alluded to do WITHOUT the additional step of Top Coating.
FnEasy is just "Easy" and that's all it is really. That, and about the singularly most hyped solution by a single person's effort ever on this Forum. The effort and excitement generated by past developments was due to both posted examples AND confirmed results by dozens who actually tried such and saw the difference. Where are those testimonials for FnEasy that go beyond "Good" into exclamtions of "Incredible"? Comments that state how nice something looks/works are not enough to herald FnEasy as the "Second Coming" or Alpha/Omega of Painted Screen solutions.
It boils down to this. If others cannot proclaim their mixes or ideas as being so superior to other applications, like you've decided you can by making statements like the last one that essentially cast doubt on the validity of anything else BUT FnEasy as being necessary, then you should stop promoting FnEasy by making such derogatory comments that many uninitiated and unknowing DIY'ers might/would take out of hand as being "Law".
I don't know why this has happened with you. Might be pride in you work/effort. I can easily relate to those feelings. It is pretty obvious by all the amount of time you spend posting that you feel strongly about your convictions. But you are being just too conclusive about things that have been proven to be far better and more effective than you seem to be trying convince others that they are...or are not as is the case.
I'm not coming down on you about discrediting any particular effort or mix, but rather that your disclaiming them all
in favor of FnEasy.
I've been there before myself, and so I feel I can make these statements knowing what I see as being nothing if not a case of unfortunate dej'a vu . It cannot lead to anything but others taking offense that you would discount things know to work out of hand as being lessor in performance, or unworthy of consideration.