or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › DIY Screen Section › The Official Silver Fire V.2 Thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Silver Fire V.2 Thread. - Page 35

post #1021 of 1462
Thank you for your fantastic advice. Spent the weekend following every step of your post. With as many blisters as I had, this took quite a while. Is the texture below on par to what I should expect? Showing a used finishing nail as reference. It does look like there is a fair amount of dust or larger particles, but this is zoomed it quite a bit. At the tip of the nail was a good size blister, I think. Can't tell where they were now. I couldn't be happier.

post #1022 of 1462
Thread Starter 
That looks very good indeed...especially for a spot repair. Or "spots" as the case was... biggrin.gif

It's not something one does with the "snap" of a finger, that's for sure....but also, it's not really beyond the abilities of someone who has never done it before either.

I'm glad I was able to describe the process well enough for you to get'ter dun. I'll try to find the Caldera-sized buggers I had to deal with, and between us, no one should resort to suicide first.
post #1023 of 1462
This is exactly what I am going to be looking for. What would you say the overall gain of this screen is? For 150" I need at least 1.2 from my throw distance. I've been scouring the threads looking for gain as it relates to each colorant version...but this post makes it seem that regardless of the colorant used the gain will be the same based on the amt of upw used? In that case is there a chart that gives amts of upw compared to amt of gain increased?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

Recently completed 2.35:1 156" diagonal Silver Fire v2.5 3.0 whose final hue of Silver/Gray was brightened via the use of additional Pearlecent (24 oz) and UPW (8 oz)
The extra reflectivity was masked a bit through the introduction of the UPW, which also help reduce any tendency of the darker SF mix to exhibit any "specularity". The end result was impressive resistance to controlled ambient light, and sufficient gain to drive into a 156" diagonal light Silver Gray surface in Low Lamp mode. And absolutely no trace of glittering, hot spotting, or observable graininess.






The "Big" shot of "The General" was taken at Noon with the side window curtain treatment wide open.

The adaptation of the original Formula can be graduated to apply to any level of Silver Fire produced by various Colorant amounts. The true secret (...as it was...) is to only use a White Pearlecent to increase gain, upping the percentage of reflective particles per volume of paint, yet attenuating them just enough to assure that they do not introduce overt individual reflections. When the percentage of reflective particles within a translucent Base...at any level of reflectiveness...rises, the result is more gain...controlled gain that saturates the paint layer more than it does usually, but without causing projected light to reflect immediately off the surface in a more severe retro reflective manner.

Such has always been the purpose and advantage of using a translucent base Mix. Let Glow, let it glow, let it glow.

A few larger examples:










post #1024 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conspiracy* View Post

This is exactly what I am going to be looking for. What would you say the overall gain of this screen is? For 150" I need at least 1.2 from my throw distance. I've been scouring the threads looking for gain as it relates to each colorant version...but this post makes it seem that regardless of the colorant used the gain will be the same based on the amt of upw used? In that case is there a chart that gives amts of upw compared to amt of gain increased?

The gain does out of hand drop when the Gray goes darker, but what happens when the Pearl and UPW is uncreased is that it drops tp a lessor degree, and as a side benefit, the additional masking the UPW provides helps virtually eliminate any "speck-ularity". (graininess) that so sometimes present in darker Grays that maintain gain via the use of reflective particles.

If you want a SF v.2.52.0 HG mix formula, I will send it to you via PM and afterward, you can relate it to the masses along with your own review.
post #1025 of 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

The gain does out of hand drop when the Gray goes darker, but what happens when the Pearl and UPW is uncreased is that it drops tp a lessor degree, and as a side benefit, the additional masking the UPW provides helps virtually eliminate any "speck-ularity". (graininess) that so sometimes present in darker Grays that maintain gain via the use of reflective particles.

If you want a SF v.2.52.0 HG mix formula, I will send it to you via PM and afterward, you can relate it to the masses along with your own review.

Yes please. I sent you a pm earlier about substrate too, not sure why but I am hesitant of painting directly on the wall, but that looks like it will be my best option.
post #1026 of 1462
Has anyone tried to spray this over an AT screen? I have a SMX screen that I would like to boost if possible.
post #1027 of 1462
Thread Starter 
It's been done with the darker paints, as well as S-I-L-V-E-R, however none of those apps were specifically geared toward increasing gain as much as they were improving contrast.

The real object was spraying correctly to avoid plugging holes and /or altering the AT properties.

For what you'd like to do, RS-MaxxMudd LL would work better, as it has significant gain . I thought that SMX had come out with a higher gain material though? Is your screen of a lower gain type? Is it Gray?

When I coated the SMX myself, one thing that stood out was that as the available reflective surface became more "reflective", the remaining openings in the weave became all the more apparent. However I never backed the material with any White cloth, and to me it seemed Black cloth would only serve to highlight the difference between "reflective and non-reflective.

One thing I suggest is to try using a backing of While Milliskin Spandex, laid in as close to...or up against the SMX material. Examine the effect closely, if suddenly you see the holes as looking "as bright as" or brighter than the SMX, then you are headed in the right direction, and an additional coating of a higher gain paint will definitely have the effect you seek.
post #1028 of 1462
The screen is white and only a 1.0 gain. Right now I dont have anything behind the screen except black and I dont notice the holes at all. i dont think that filling the holes would be an issue either. I just really would like to see some pictures of how it performs compared to a typical screen. i would hate to spray something on my screen to not gain anything or even ruin it. If this does work for me and I do notice the holes the spandex is a great idea though.

If you have pics that would be fantastic. I posted the request in that thread as well hoping someone has some.
post #1029 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by adammb View Post


If you have pics that would be fantastic. I posted the request in that thread as well hoping someone has some.

Which thread?

As I said, as far as increasing perceived contrast, the applications worked great. The object being to introduce Pearl & Silver elements to enhance colors, contrast, and at least slightly improve ambient light performance. To go down the "Gain" path would only require using the appropriate Mix, and to achieve 1.2 - 1.3 gain is entirely possible, and frankly, as long as the spraying is done correctly, you could not possibly wind up in a state of lessor performance.

However at this conjecture I don't know of any Photos that could reference the results of such. Just a conclusion based on reasoning out the effect of painting a 1.3 gain paint onto a 1.0 gain white surface.
post #1030 of 1462
I found a thread for RS-MaxxMudd LL on avsforum. I posted in there. I was just hoping someone had something showing the performance of any of these product compared to a standard screen. Every screenshot is an entire screen and with camera settings you could make almost any shot look good IMO. I am having trouble even finding a picture showing the difference between 1.0-1.1-1.2 etc.
post #1031 of 1462
Anyone knows or have any opinion about this spray gun?
http://www.varo.com/3198/12425/paint-spray-guns/pow754-paint-spray-gun-600w.aspx
It has a 1.8mm nozzle.Is it good for SF mixture?
post #1032 of 1462
Do you have a 230V outlet to plug it in?
post #1033 of 1462
Of course!!! I am from Greece smile.gifsmile.gif
post #1034 of 1462
Seems to be a decent gun. Lots of power and the hand piece seems to be good quality. I would prefer the hose to be longer and a smaller needle. More freedom to move and a finer spray/duster.
post #1035 of 1462
Thx , but in general it will do the job i suppose!!!
post #1036 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnym30 View Post

Thx , but in general it will do the job i suppose!!!

You might wanna check that out with that Chick from Delphi first. I hear she reads a mean Palm. biggrin.gif

A 1.8 mm needle is OK...you just want to be certain to use the Duster method carefully, and if you are to err at all, err conservatively. Applying paint too sparsely is always correctable. Too heavily.....not so much.
post #1037 of 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

You might wanna check that out with that Chick from Delphi first. I hear she reads a mean Palm. biggrin.gif

A 1.8 mm needle is OK...you just want to be certain to use the Duster method carefully, and if you are to err at all, err conservatively. Applying paint too sparsely is always correctable. Too heavily.....not so much.


Thx , i just wanted to know if the needle was ok.
Of course i will do a lot of practice with the gun before starting my screen. Have you checked your PM's MM? Just waiting for a reply.
Thanks in advance once more.
post #1038 of 1462
How does the shade of gray differ in SF, BW and Supernova Blade? Blade seems to be the darkest (?) and BW seems to be pretty light. Coud you give noob numbers for me like BW is X% lighter than Blade etc?

Nighttime I never have celiing lights on, but I'm planning to have one floor lamp similar to these or something. Does those kind of lamps affect the image much?
Edited by onse - 4/4/13 at 4:35am
post #1039 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by onse View Post

How does the shade of gray differ in SF, BW and Supernova Blade? Blade seems to be the darkest (?) and BW seems to be pretty light. Coud you give noob numbers for me like BW is X% lighter than Blade etc?

Nighttime I never have celiing lights on, but I'm planning to have one floor lamp similar to these or something. Does those kind of lamps affect the image much?

SF is a infinitely adjustable mjx, and it's shade of Gray can range from a Silvery White to a very Dark Gray.....the latter being bery close to the same as the SN Blade.

There's really no comparison between SF and BW... as BW only comes in one flavor, and is at best bland in comparison.

I don't really have enough information about your situation, as to what type of projector you have and its throw distance along with screen size. however based on what you have written, I would state that you need a SF 3 .0
post #1040 of 1462
I'm looking new apartment atm (few different options) so can't give any details of that yet, but the projector will be placed around 4 metres from the screen on the back wall or the ceiling next to the back wall. One or two walls (at least the wall where the screen is) will be painted dark grey and two walls will be white (back wall and at least on of the side walls). Ceiling is white and floor is dark wood. Big windows on one side of the room. No windows on the other walls. Windows will almost always have long "see through" type curtains (some white and some darker colors). Projector will be most likely one of the cheaper Epsons (don't have pj yet either). Screen size 90-100". And night time like I said propably one of those floor type of mood lamps will be on. Though if I'm watching a movie then most of the time no lights will be on.

How does the SF 3.0 compare to BW in terms of shade of grey? SF 5.0 is close to Blade?
Edited by onse - 4/5/13 at 6:45am
post #1041 of 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by onse View Post

How does the SF 3.0 compare to BW in terms of shade of grey? SF 5.0 is close to Blade?
You may first want to find out how the two compare in terms of gain and acceptable viewing cone.
post #1042 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka View Post

You may first want to find out how the two compare in terms of gain and acceptable viewing cone.

He has no need to want...or wait. Here's the skinny.

SF v.2.5 3.0 is darker than BW, but still it has higher gain than BW (1.1 vs .85)...and it's viewing cone is almost entirely unrestricted when judged by the fact that at fully 80 degrees off-axis it hasn't lost even 20% of it's on axis gain. Not 50%....not even 30%....but less than 20%. So little in fact that almost no one who has actually ever made a SF Screen has ever reported there being "any" noticeable loss of gain at even 90 degrees off axis.

What this means is that the term "Half Gain" doesn't even apply to SF. That is not to say that it does apply to BW. No...BW also has a very wide viewing cone. But BW is a sub-1.0 gain screen that essentially starts out attenuating light...just has any Neutral Gray does. It simply uses Aluminum to low effect....not to accentuate light but rather to simply enhance color. And...to even prevent the aluminum content from horribly pushing Blue, it must be mixed in disproportionately small amounts into a Beige base, and in such manner that the Base paint masks the aluminum's reflectivity by a substantial amount. So one must consider that without a beige Base, aluminum would essentially be a very poor choice for use as a reflectivity enhancing agent. And with a beige base employed, it winds up being only a marginal amount better than a neutral Gray derived via conventional tenting processes.

So given that with SF there is no determinable loss of gain to the "eye"...at any angle of viewing, and a obvious difference in overall performance, there is no real valid need to compare the two, .......but if one wants to bring in any additional comparisons based on the worthiness of SF as opposed to BW, as far as ambient light performance...especially at SF 3.0+ levels....it all becomes kinda moot. One determining factor in that? Nowhere can you find photographic results of BW screens that show performance even remotely akin to SF. But you sure have literally thousands of such examples of SF screens,and a wealth of End Euser testomonials to that effect.

But really...and honestly, if you want to read anything favorable about BW, you'll have to look elsewhere. You won't find anyone expounding about it on here. For that matter, the reverse is true elsewhere as well.

Pick your poison. But choose wisely. wink.gif
post #1043 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by onse View Post


How does the SF 3.0 compare to BW in terms of shade of grey? SF 5.0 is close to Blade?
Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka View Post

You may first want to find out how the two compare in terms of gain and acceptable viewing cone.

He has no need to want...or wait. Here's the skinny.

SF v.2.5 3.0 is darker than BW, but still it has higher gain than BW (1.1 vs .85)...and it's viewing cone is almost entirely unrestricted when judged by the fact that at fully 80 degrees off-axis it hasn't lost even 20% of it's on axis gain. Not 50%....not even 30%....but less than 20%. So little in fact that almost no one who has actually ever made a SF Screen has ever reported there being "any" noticeable loss of gain at even 90 degrees off axis.

What this means is that the term "Half Gain" doesn't even apply to SF. That is not to say that it does apply to BW. No...BW also has a very wide viewing cone. But BW is a sub-1.0 gain screen that essentially starts out attenuating light...just has any Neutral Gray does. It simply uses Aluminum to low effect....not to accentuate light but rather to simply enhance color. And...to even prevent the aluminum content from horribly pushing Blue, it must be mixed in disproportionately small amounts into a Beige base, and in such manner that the Base paint masks the aluminum's reflectivity by a substantial amount. So one must consider that without a beige Base, aluminum would essentially be a very poor choice for use as a reflectivity enhancing agent. And with a beige base employed, it winds up being only a marginal amount better than a neutral Gray derived via conventional tenting processes.

So given that with SF there is no determinable loss of gain to the "eye"...at any angle of viewing, and a obvious difference in overall performance, there is no real valid need to compare the two, .......but if one wants to bring in any additional comparisons based on the worthiness of SF as opposed to BW, as far as ambient light performance...especially at SF 3.0+ levels....it all becomes kinda moot. One determining factor in that? Nowhere can you find photographic results of BW screens that show performance even remotely akin to SF. But you sure have literally thousands of such examples of SF screens,and a wealth of End User testimonials to that effect.

But really onse...and honestly, if you want to read anything favorable about BW, you'll have to look elsewhere. You won't find anyone expounding about it on here. For that matter, the reverse is true elsewhere as well.

Pick your poison. But choose wisely. wink.gif
post #1044 of 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post



SF v.2.5 3.0 is darker than BW, but still it has higher gain than BW (1.1 vs .85)...and it's viewing cone is almost entirely unrestricted when judged by the fact that at fully 80 degrees off-axis it hasn't lost even 20% of it's on axis gain. Not 50%....not even 30%....but less than 20%. So little in fact that almost no one who has actually ever made a SF Screen has ever reported there being "any" noticeable loss of gain at even 90 degrees off axis.

Can you kindly point me to the measurements you are referencing? The only measurements I am aware of were done a few years back. At the time SF scored gain of 1 but only within narrow 30 degree window, with gain dropping rapidly beyond +/- 15 degree off-axis points.



by comparison BW maintains 0.9 gain within 120 degree range with only mild decrease by +/- 75 degree points




I am sure you've seen the charts before MM. And no doubt you are aware of many users reporting hot spotting issues. I only recite the info here for onse benefit.
post #1045 of 1462
Hello everyone!
1. paints check
2. sintra board 6mm check
3. sprayer hvlp (inbound)
4. Projector (undecided). Maybe you can help me here. I am stuck between hw50es and rs46 or 4810. I can get the sony for a few hundred less than 4810. I don't have a dedicated HT room. Walls color is beige, boc draperies, white ceiling. Which one should i pick ? I enjoy watching movies, 3d would be nice but not the main priority and i elected for a 16:9 ration screen due to my ps3 games/tv
5. What version of silver fire should i go for?

Ty for all the effort you put into this forum!
post #1046 of 1462
post #1044's so called charts...

wow. talk about embellishment!
ok.. more than embellishment... ...total falsehood with a period.
rolleyes.gif
post #1047 of 1462
I will start my SF 4.0 in the morning. Any final input before the mix it will be appreciated. MM where are u? smile.gif
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1466454/diy-screen-options
post #1048 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurohc View Post

I will start my SF 4.0 in the morning. Any final input before the mix it will be appreciated. MM where are u? smile.gif
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1466454/diy-screen-options

Morning has broken......I hope nothing else follows suit. tongue.gif
post #1049 of 1462
My only suggestion based on my recent experience is to be careful to not touch the screen during or after spraying. My screen was complete and my son was helping me put up the screen surround (with triple black velvet) when he touched the screen surface in a few places with typically grubby fingers. Guess what I can see now that we're watching movies? Frustrating and I will need to cover everything to run another one or two dusters on the screen to fix it. So be careful.

Otherwise just follow the directions found in this thread and it should go smoothly.
post #1050 of 1462
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scoob5555 View Post

My only suggestion based on my recent experience is to be careful to not touch the screen during or after spraying. My screen was complete and my son was helping me put up the screen surround (with triple black velvet) when he touched the screen surface in a few places with typically grubby fingers. Guess what I can see now that we're watching movies? Frustrating and I will need to cover everything to run another one or two dusters on the screen to fix it. So be careful.

Otherwise just follow the directions found in this thread and it should go smoothly.

Use a Prevail Bottle sprayer and diluted SF and "spot Dust" the affected area with a feathering sweep across it. No need to cover anything but the adjoining trim.

http://www.worldpaintsupply.com/preval-model-267-paint-spray-gun/

........also found at Home Depot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Screen Section
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Screens › DIY Screen Section › The Official Silver Fire V.2 Thread.