CRMA/MM Superplex Formula - Page 53

dokworm-
Interesting thoughts about the rear pj material. Someone should try this.

As for the paint, I respectfully disagree that you won't see any difference. The MMud paint is very transluscent (by design) and even several coats of it are not opaque by any stretch of the imagination. One of the benefits of the mirror ais the added depth of the reflection that very slightly blurs the image enough to remove almost all traces of screendoor. For those of us with LCD pjs, SDE can be annoying and the mirror definitely helps in this regard. I'm still "struggling" with this benefit versus the smaller screen size of the mirror. My SM/MM wall screen is 94" diag versus the 88" diag mirror and colors are exceptional on both (though slightly truer on the wall screen). I still haven't decided which to go with "permanently."

I'm not saying that you won't see any difference, only that one way to see the point that "X amount of coats results in there being no possible difference" would be to do the 'glass test'.

I would think that the 'back glow' that gets rid of the screendoor effect could have a horribly detrimental effect on ANSI CR.

I would like to see this type of screen tested on an image that has extremely bright and dark shadow detail in the same scene, as I think this type of screen may have light scatter issues.

All just theorising, but I would really like to see some solid measurement tests on these various 'wonder screens'

I do love all the DIY screen threads, and hope that someone comes up with a real killer one day, but as DarinP has stated, no one screen is good for everyone.
If you have no light control in your room, (or have light walls and ceiling) then you will need one type of screen, if you have complete light control and black velvet walls and ceiling, then a different screen type would do better. If you only have 4 seats in the cinema vs 20 seats, then viewing cones are either a problem or a blessing.

If you suffer from screen door then a diffusing/blurring/double imaging screen may help, but would just lose detail on a CRT setup with no advantages...

No one screen would suit all of these scenarios, and they are only a few examples.

Amen!

We all have preferrences what works for us. So often we forget what's important to the other guy.
On the other hand, I, like Scoob, do have an LCD PJ and know exactly where Scoob is coming from.
Knowing what I know now, If I owned a 9"CRT PJ I'd give serious consideration to a rear projection set up. Just a thought.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by dokworm

No one screen would suit all of these scenarios, and they are only a few examples.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Zat so?





Awwww, I dun no 'bout all dat.

I'm taking a break from the Shootout at present, and coming off some pretty effusive praise and backslapping over Light Fusion. (the screen was sold 5 minutes after the lights came up) KBK gave me a big Thumbs UP, and brother, that means more to me than most of you could realize.

Comments? Here they are, and everyone a big relief.

Incredible Detail
Great Color Uniformity
Bright as a, (ahem...) SilverStar, and with NO artifacts.
It's the Hit Of The Show
I have to get 2' away to see any pixel structure!
Smoothest image here today!

...but the quick sale, and the fact that I had 10-12 people waiting to talk to me as soon as the lights went up was especially gratifying.

Now, to matters at hand.

dokworm,

The Mirror is CR enhancing, so strike one.
The depth of the light field is what attenuates SDE. Strike 2.
Coverage has EVERYTHING to do with the resulting performance. Remember, only longer wavelengths of light pass through and have the waveform energy required to reflect back with enough punch to infuse the screen with additional 'darker contrast'. The balance of the reflective light comes from the light energy existent on the rear of the paint. Get enough paint on (...but not too much.) and the mirror makes sure a goodly quotient of that energy works to boost luminosity on the screen's surface overall, like a light bulb shining through a Lampshade, or better still, a Slide Viewer.

Only Light Fusion is a Slide Viewer that gets help from both sides. Strike 3.

Another interesting tidbit.

The SilverStar claims a gain of 6.0 Light Fusion was virtually every bit as bright. You figure out what that means.

The StudioTek 140 was a real good contender, and actually, tougher overall competition than the SS or GreyHawk. It will be interesting to see which Screen is adjudged best overall.

Sooooo......, all this means to say what I've felt all along. Light Fusion DOES INDEED do so many various thing VERY well, that when price is factored in along with performance, and a Fixed Screen is not an issue, then yes, it is a solid choice to make for virtually any PJ.

AND THAT MEANS CRTs TOO!

Gowldurnit !

OK, I'm going to go wander back to the Show. The PJ review is underway, and with so many minds there doin' the analyzing, I'm not too worried about all that. My task is complete.


OH yeah! Fergot to mention the Silver Screen "One Coat".

CMRA..., never mention ME again. Behr's SilverScreen is Much Mo Better!
That Screen sold right after the LF! GREAT brightness, GREAT contrast, and NO Hotspotting. It matched up beside the GreyHawk and ate that dusky old Bird alive...feathers and all. Almost twice as bright, and with better colors and detail. (...thanks to the Spray job probably..) and at a total cost of $25.00, including 1 Qt. Paint, 4'x8' Hardboard, and Beer.

Don't nobody say I'm stuck on Plastic, 'cuz you betcha I'll be spraying that stuff up whenever it makes sense to do so. I recommend it heartily!

That's all for now, I'll let independent results, and the official Shootout results speak from hear on out.

But thanks to everyone of you for all the support and willingness to believe. And thanks to those of you who were (still are?) die hard skeptics yet kept as much of an open mind as possible. Why, thanks are even due to the select few who gave us such an intolerably hard time, for it was the determination to be able to say' See, whaddidItellya."

But lastly, special thanks to CMRA, the Man without whose own encouragement and involvement, I would have most certainly NOT been able to accomplish what has occurred.

MM.

OK,
We got the message. But the real results rest in the the hearts, minds, and eyes of ALL the attendees. Over the next few days many will post their own independent reviews and Mandarax will post the official tally. Not that I'm not rooting for light fusion ( I made the first three ever produced), it's just validation MUST come from folks completely independent of our madness...folks who are unbiased in any way.

Now about that comment on ME:

"CMRA..., never mention ME again. Behr's SilverScreen is Much Mo Better!
That Screen sold right after the LF! GREAT brightness, GREAT contrast, and NO Hotspotting. It matched up beside the GreyHawk and ate that dusky old Bird alive...feathers and all. "

Have you fogotten your roots? It was ME, ME+, and ME-Lite that got us on the road to light fusion. And, in no small part to Scoob's efforts also. And, do you not recall the two posters who parted with their GrayHawks in favor of ME? This isn't to say ME is the 'better' solution it once was, just it has its place and in some circles retains its popularity. I still keep my ME screen if only for sentimental reasons. After all, it's serial No. 000001.

Lastly, all members/readers may need to be reminded that LFS is still a work-in-progress. In my dungeon, as I write, are the advanced formulations ready to be put to the test. If AVS members approved of LFS in Canada they just might go nuts over these. There's also the first surface solutions soon to be tried. More Later. CMRA

Hi MM-

What projectors have you demo'd the LF on? Didja get a chance to grace it with some warm cathode glow? Man I wish I was there! I'd come back with gigabytes of same-scene same-digicam-settings screenshots.

What material did you use under the LF? Mirror, acrylic, or first-surface acrylic?

Have fun up there!
Clarence

Here is a link to the first reports from the Canuck shootout. I believe this was the very first post:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...37#post3682337

The SuperPlex ambassador was none other than MississippiMan himself. I'd be grateful if everyone reading would take a moment and post him and the hosts a thank you for the TREMENDOUS effort they all put forward making this event happen.

I love seeing unsolicited comments like this...


and this

and this

and this

Not yet! But...maybe now they might. Ken and MissMan, don't unpack your suit cases just yet. Your 15 minutes of fame awaits!

By the way, why would these guys be interested in DIY?

MM,

Congratulations on the great results.

Some of these claims seem to go against physics, though. Longer and shorter wavelengths are different colors, so if this claim were true then you would have changed the color, not the intensity. Are you claiming that the reflection back is a different color? As far as CR, I think it would be great to have someone measure . Are you claiming that you are increasing on/off CR without ambient light, on/off CR with ambient light, or ANSI CR in one of these cases? Also, are you saying that just the perception is better, or that actual measurements will show an improvement?

And as far as this anti-SDE thing, you are reflecting light from one pixel into adjacent pixels (assuming 100% fill ratio). Isn't that correct? If that is the case it will reduce SDE on some LCDs, but have you tried this on the AE500, which has smoothscreen already? Or on LCOS that has much higher fill ratio? As I see it you are either lighting up areas adjacent to the pixels or you aren't. If you are, then with enough fill ratio you now have some pixel overlap. Maybe not a killer, but I do wonder what the advantage would be on a CRT.

What is 'darker contrast'? ANSI contrast ratio is basically defined by the ratio between the intensity of the white squares and the intensity of the black squares in a checkboard pattern. Are you increasing the intensity of the whites more than the blacks? If so, how? Remember that light is made up of photons and if 10% the photons are reflected back that is true whether it is an intense beam or a dim beam in this case (from the same direction). Now if you have a color shift then you can increase CR like a color filter does, but that wouldn't be true for a projector that already had the right color balance. Are you doing any color shifting?

Any surface that a light hits will have some reflections, so when the light reflects off the back mirror and to the next surface some of the photons should be reflected back again. This is the kind of thing that can decrease ANSI CR as Dokworm pointed out and is a reason for high grade optics. This is also why Sharp recently changed some flat panel LCD panels to remove a layer which had the side effect of increasing ANSI CR. The only way to know if the ANSI CR has been decreased or increased is to measure it.

I really would like to understand how this stuff is working and all the effects and I think it would be good for you to also. Have you tried this on a CRT? You are making claims about how it would do, but can you explain the physics of this bleed over effect with something that basically has no SDE? Also, CRTs have color coming from 3 distinct locations, so they have some special requirements compared to projectors with all the light coming from one location. There are some guys down in Atlanta with some 9" CRTs from the CRT forum here that would probably like to try this screen (Terry for one) and I'm sure many would love to hear their opinions. I think they also have some good measuring equipment.

--Darin

The SDE was my observation and was a benefit associated with my lower resolution Z1. The Z2, a higher res PJ, did not enjoy this benefit when I tried it. Obviously, it's a non-issue with CRTs. It also required the 'minor' defocus adjustment to work.

The best way to check out light fusion isn't to talk about it. Holy cow. How hard is it to get a mirror and roll on some translucent paint? Simply see for yourself. Do you really think MM can put together a white paper and address the science behind this? Don't hold your breath.

Lastly, have you considered rear projection? The 9" CRT camp is bringing this solution forward in a big way.

anyway, best wishes and thanks for reading.

I specifically asked a while ago about how this would work with projectors with different resolutions, fill ratios, etc. and how this was better than the defocus trick talked about at length on other forums. The answer from MM here was that this was working for 1388x768 projectors and he claimed that no defocussing was needed since "SDE is no longer a factor". The opposite of what you claim here.

SDE is a non-issue with CRTs, but if there is some reflection coming back, you don't see how this SDE reduction feature could be a negative on a projector with no SDE? Have you tried it?

From your posts about these screens I'm sure you can understand how light coming from 3 different sources would create a unique challenge. I'm still waiting to find out if anybody has tried this with a CRT or whether the claims are just guesses.

WTF. MM told me he would send me a sample of one that he did, as you have read here. Then there would be no question about whether the screen was made correctly and I could report gains, etc. That obviously never happened.

I tried. I even offered to pay all costs so that we could get some actual measurements with professional equipment and small observations about effects here.

Not really, but if claims are going to be made then they should be backed up. MM was the one who started talking about wavelengths of light, so I don't think questions around a subject that was already started are out of line at all. One obvious option was to provide one to someone who could look at these small details and report, as I had offered to do.

Nope. I want a big screen and in that case this works best with enough space for all that. I'm also not interested in CRT projection for myself as I use digitals. However, I do advise people on what might work for them.

I also believe in keeping claims here honest. I think that some of the physics explanations for effects of different screens have been figured out on this forum and have helped to dispell some myths that had flourished here.

If your screen is the same then I think this would mean that your screen is somewhere in the 3.0 range, since that is about what Tryg and I observed on his SilverStar at his place. The SilverStar and the High Power (2.8 gain claimed) were almost the same in their viewing cones. I don't believe that 6.0 gain claim on the SilverStar unless it is to one very small spot. I didn't have my measuring equipment with me and don't have a SilverStar sample to measure, though.

--Darin

Hi Darin-

I think Terry would be a perfect candidate for detailed and candid trial, test, and analysis of CRT on Fusion. He's got the PJs, the skills, the test equipment, and the respect. Plus, he's driving distance from MM.

I'd still like to be a guinea pig for CRT+Fusion, too. After painting my own cheap mirror with rolled Kilz, I was convinced there's more to this than hype. I was planning to use a 12' fusion MM screen with my Marquee CRT in my new house, but with the ceiling height, I think I'm going to try RP.

But after seeing the results of using standard surface mirrors for RP vs first-order, I suspect first-surface mirrors (or acrylic) will also serve better for CRTs with painted mirror screens. Since CRTs don't need the 10% SDE fill effect, the refraction won't be needed.

Have Terry (chuchuf) and Maurice (MississippiMan) approached each other about this ideal test? Terry has probably seen (and even measured) more real world screen setups than 99% of us (every name brand, torus, RP, you name it). When he reports FtL and maps color results, he's not just guessing.

MM passed his 10 second sanity check with flying colors at the shoot-out. If he could get measured numbers from Terry along with some confirmed grins when using CRTs (and an indication whether standard-mirror or first-surface mirrored acrylic works best) ... wow!

-Clarence

CONGRADULATIONS MM..... I am glad you have some early good reviews regarding Light fusion. I have never heard anybody here claim that it was overly bright even by cmra or scoob, so this new development on as bright as a silver star i think was just a little mm hype, but what i did notice on my sprayed and then another rolled mirrors was a consistent slight defocussing which seemed to refocus a little more each progressive coat. My measurement was simply the different resolutions i needed to see scan lines . And the brightest my light fusion ever was was after the first coat and it toned down every coat after that, so after three or four coats it was about the same as my mm painted back screen , But who knows maybe mississippi has added something new to the mix or top coated it with something to make it this bright, with him you never know he might have found something new at the airport and decided to try it , as i cannot see three or four coats of a flat white being as bright as a silver star . But i do not want to start knocking LF it obviously showed well to some people and i don't want to rain on mm parade.. he sounds like he has just hit his first home run in the big leagues and in a way he might have . You don't have to kick a commercial screens ass to compete with it !!!! " comparable "at a tenth the cost is just as effective of a selling point . Good job Mississippi.

Bruce

PS i ALMOST FORGOT Good job CMRA .......

Here goes:
"SDE is a non-issue with CRTs, but if there is some reflection coming back, you don't see how this SDE reduction feature could be a negative on a projector with no SDE? Have you tried it?"

I'm lucky to have my 'lowly' Z1. Clarence is the only member I know who has made any effort using a CRT. I too share your genuine curiosity.

"MM told me he would send me a sample of one that he did"

After he squares with me, first. Wait in line please.

"I tried. I even offered to pay all costs so that we could get some actual measurements with professional equipment and small observations about effects here. "

Try plan B. Get a 4' mirror from HD for $7.00 and mock up your own. Why depend on someone else?

"Not really, but if claims are going to be made then they should be backed up. "

I agree.

"Nope. I want a big screen and in that case this works best with enough space for all that. "

My research confirmed up to 200" RP screens are manfactured and sold.

"I also believe in keeping claims here honest. "

Agreed.

CMRA i guess congradulations are in order for you as well as the fusion pioneer . I think i have done some research on fusion and crt . IN fact i think that out of all Clarence's endeavors he has tested light fusion the least of all his experiments. I noticed he has rolled and sprayed a small mirror with kilz, and has actually purchased mm mud ingredients a long time ago but has never used it on a mirror or even used it at all on anything , as far as i have read, Clarence will correct me if i am wrong .
but you must be a little proud CMRA of the positive response your fusion baby has had at the shoot out, so again congratulations on your effort

Bruce

PS on your research did you find the distance a rp room would have to be for a 200" rp screen , I think that is what Darin meant when he was talking about size constraints.

I don't think CMRA was trying to overstate the extent of my testing when he said "Clarence is the only member I know who has made any effort using a CRT."

That's a true statement.

I'm limited to do full-scale CRT fusion testing by three things:
- I need a larger mirror
- I need a larger sprayer
- time

And now, I'd need a painted mirror that can do rear projection
I'm unexplicably obsessed with hiding my CRT in a projection closet behind the screen instead of having it hang in the middle of my HT right above the best seat in the house, and right at the spot where my head bumps when I stand up.

I took my small Kilz mirror over to genmax's house and tested it with his incredible NEC XG. Same overwhelming positive results. We both stood there for 10 minutes saying "wow". Then we'd walk over to the side and look at it from 180... again "wow".

I've tested a lot of screen experiments. 4 shades of white walls, white 4x8 Formica, 6 WilsonArt metallics, tinfoil, bedsheets, shower curtains, RP scraps...

Rolled kilz on a 2'x4' mirror was the best that I've seen. I'm confident that anybody with a larger mirror and better painting skill can achieve even better results... with any projector, digital or CRT.

-Clarence

Clarence
I know you have experimented with many things , and gone into depth when you experiment ,and at that time of kilz and mirrors you were not mentioning rp as a solution . I have just noticed you have bought a larger mirror for your rp experiment . I was just pointing out that you had not tried the mm mix on a mirror yet for any reason, it did not matter what the reason it was just a fact , and you had bought the fusion mix a couple of months ago . Maybe i was just being defensive as my efforts not being entirely favourable were dismissed from CMRA , and i was just pointing out that you had not actually tried light fusion with mm even though you had purchased it and at that time you were experimenting with many FP options . But Clarence did you ever even roll the 2' by 4' mirror with mm mud after your exciting discovery as you had the mm mix in a gallon, so wasting it wasn't a concern, and you have experimented with formica and other things since then , I just thought with the best experiment you had tried to date you might be curious to roll a few coats on , as Mississippi was rolling coats up until December then he switched to spraying . so rolling was and is a viable method . I noticed promise with your experiments for crt , Your rolled kilz mirror looked brighter to me as well . Did you roll more than one coat of kilz on that mirror ? anyway i found your experiments promising so i painted some mirrors as per mississippi's instructions end of story. All moot points now , as you have found rp a viable option and i hope it works out well . So as far as crt's and light fusion i would hope you don't waste your sm and mm, send it over to genmax's house so that we can do a real test on crt and light fusion, i heard he was real excited with the kilz sample as well, and he had a sprayer

Bruce

Bruce,
Coming from you, that means a lot. But don't think for a minute I'm going to just sit on my laurels. The next generation of light fusion is being tested at this very moment. First surface is also on the drawing board.

The 200" solutions would most likely fair better with a mirror arrangement and a serious light cannon (or two).

Quick question, how much more percieved gain does the light fusion screen have over the SM/MM mix painted on a wall?

Good luck on first surface CMRA, and the fusion refinements that you are doing as well.
I think that a first surface mirror would be a better backing for a crt based fusion screen as well as my slight defocused image was a reality .
Bruce

Bruce,
MM called me from Canada and informed me he used the same mix I have here in my shop. Just so everyone knows it's equal amounts of Behr pastel base, white opal pearlescent, and UPW with a smidge of red oxide colorant.
Dilution for spraying: add six oz. of distilled water to 14 oz of mix.

Come to think of it...he did have to use Moose water!

Anyway, here's a look-see on an identical screen:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...99#post3675899

hey CMRA pastel base or deep base?
ok i remember that on your personal screen you guys used a pastel base instead of deep right?

bruce

right! and water not floetrol.

BTW: Please don't take my questions to imply that I don't think there is the potential for something great here. I really like the idea of a SilverStar replacement without the sheen I see on that one. Especially if it is much less expensive. I can already think of one person I know who would be a good candidate for this. And I may get/make/'pay someone to make' one at some point here.

Once you pass the first hurdle or two then of course many more questions come out. Like:

How does it do in rooms with dark walls vs white wall vs other screens?
How does it do with ambient light vs other screens in rooms with dark walls or light walls vs other screens?
Does it shift colors at all from any normal viewing angle?
How does it do with short throw vs long throw? Table mount vs ceiling mount vs shelf mount overhead?
Does is affect ANSI CR measurements?
What is the gain straight on? What is the gain curve across angles?
How does it work with different projector technologies and different projectors within those technologies?
Does it affect sharpness from any viewing angle?
Any side effects not covered above?

I hope that we can get Terry involved in answering some of these questions from the CRT side and maybe Tryg would be willing to review one. He lives about 90 miles from me, so I would be willing to provide a couple of projectors and some measuring equipment either in his room, or in two of my rooms (one with black velvet walls and one with off-white walls).

Anybody near Seattle (Tryg is south and I'm north) want to make one of these for review? I would be willing to pay some money for materials and if I was going to get to keep it, probably kick in some extra money for time and effort. I would personally rather spend my time testing and pay someone else to do the spraying, cleanup, etc. That is just what I enjoy more and also have other things on my plate.

My one concern here is that with someone else making the screen there will be issues with whether too much material was put on, or not enough.
Also, is there any curing time needed before measurements should be taken?

--Darin

Darin,
I promise I won't. But, tell me, do you grill Vutec and Stewart with the same questions?
If so, how did they respond?

For people who are interested in the shoot out results here is a new page that was created specifically for this, and mandarax promises official results coming soon .
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...37#post3684237

Bruce

CMRA ...as you proclaim to be the founder of light fusion , you are in the front of the line!!! you will receive questions like this, and if you are developing screens that you have an interest in copyrighting or marketing the screen then why not do some tests in order to answer these questions and how many times do you think these companies you mention have been taken to task about their claims . Every review they go through does this . I would try not to take things personal in these questions . You must realize that in every claim made there has to be some sort way to explain or back them up , this goes for everybody and every product . You remember recently your asking people to prove it to you why R P is superior, you wanted to see proof , ... this is the same idea . One question i have CMRA is that did you find your screen had a noticeable higher gain over a upw screen ?
Bruce

PS: Darin i would be willing to paint a screen or two or three for you or tryg to review or use personally. but to not step on anybody's toes i would ask mississippi again if he was up to painting one up for you, as he has had the most experience with all of the different mixtures and subtle changes that CMRA and Mississippi have done recently to the mm mix.

Bruce

Yep. If people come here claiming things about wavelengths and SDE reductions and things, then yes, I ask them to back them up. In the sense that their reps don't come here making claims like MM does I don't, but if you look back I have grilled people who have made claims about the Stewart products and I have questioned Vutec's specs and demos. One of these ended up gaining a lot of knowledge (with the help of others) and the debunking of a myth (about the Firehawk having different gains for different light levels). And I post my impressions of some of these screens and how they compare to each other with the products I have. Many of the things, like viewing cone are published by Stewart and the cone for the High Power has already been posted, so there is no need for anyone else to go there.

As far as how they responded, the reps don't tend to hang out here. The people here making claims at first tried to continue them and then had to mostly back down when the physics proved them wrong. I have talked to at least one rep in person and in the discussion it was obvious that they didn't understand the differences between certain screens and side effects. I figured I wasn't going to make it very far with them and would need to talk to someone more knowledgable at their company in order to get any further.

With some of these products I do preclude them fairly quickly. With the SilverStar I saw the sheen and didn't like it, so I wouldn't buy one. At that point my personal interest in doing much more testing with that screen diminished quite a bit.

--Darin

Good food for thought , gentlemen. I'll PM you if you don't have any objections. Perhaps you can fill me in on the details. Nothing like a little science behind something to validate its claims.