Metallic Silver/ MississippiMud screen intructions - Page 15

[quote=BGrigg]Hello,

A buddy of mine has an Optoma ep739 projector is using the wall above his fireplace as the screen. I was thinking of getting him a bucket of paint for Christmas, but after reading the ingredients & instructions, I'm thinking of maybe just getting him a HD giftcard of $50 or $75 and then going with him when he wants to actually paint the wall, rather than have the mixed bucket of paint sit around for a month or more.

Couple questions though with regards to the wall being above the fireplace. Will the heat of the fireplace help or hurt us when painting/drying? Also, and probably more importantly, there are 2 grated vents in the middle of where the projected screen will be.

Whoa. Let's stop there and "reflect". Whoops. Can't do a good job of that with a "Grate", even a flat sided one with slots at the bottom. If it was raised enough to make any difference as to the amount of ventilation it would allow (CFM) it would produce a noticible shadow across the screen around it's edges. While this might work in a commercial setting with a huge screen viewed from a distance, but in a Home setting? Such would be pretty much a slap in the face as far as quality viewing is concerned.

So I'm putting together a viable alternative, in a design I myself would not hesitate using. I'm assuming the inclusion of the Vents in the original equation was desired because you(He?) does not want to give up whatever size is available over that Fireplace....inclusive of the "Vent" area.

So I'll be addressing that issue.

You came onto this thread asking about both surface application choices as well as "Paint" so I'll assume you (He?) does want to paint. In a "Normal World", if I was presented the problem, I'd first notice if the Fireplace is built into a abutment enclosure (Framed out Column) or if it was a "Flat Wall" variety. If a Column type, I'd suggest relocating the vents to each respective side, covering the holes and overlaying a material like 1/4" Drywall cut to your desired screen's dimensions.

That material will be smooth, readily accept both primer and paint (Duh?) can be firmly affixed directly to the existing wall at the perimeters with drywall screws, then the MS/MM (or perhaps MMud-SE) painted directly "On the wall" with either rolling or spraying.

Flat wall? Can't envision or contemplate moving those Vent Grates? Well the solution to all that is to effect a Screen Veneer overlayed on a substrate rigidly affixed to the Wall. One that would stand off that wall at least 2", with "Top to Bottom" pleneums for the vent areas, and side blocking as well to prevent wayward glances into the area existing between the wall and the rear of the screen. In effect, the screen will be an assembly about 2.5" thick, consisting of 7 vertical "2x2s", two of each creating the aforementioned Pleneums. Two provide the cosmetic "Side View Blocking" aspect, while all work to provide the necessary rigidity and support for the substrate, which should be 1/2" MDF.

The entire assembly could be either screwed into place, or hung with the French Cleat method. I'll try to provide a somewhat more detailed explanation via a simple line Drawing, edited into this space soon.




Well don't be alarmed. I'll be here for both procedural and moral support.


When I return, I will hope to see more info from you.

Size of wall area (Width and Height)
Height of Fireplace Mantel
Seating distance / configuration
Lighting scheme***

With the "O", you do not want a "Bright White", or any surface that might even have a hint of potential Hot Spotting in it's pedigree. If easy is what your (He?) is looking for, then a variant on the latest derivative of the MM Silver/Pearl/UPW combination would be a good choice indeed. It's commonly known as RS-MaxxMudd, and it's components are less expensive the the original SM/MM MMud-SE concepts, and application via rolling or spraying is easier as well.

As for heat issues, if your Mantel's edge protrudes at least 8", you'll have nothing to be concerned about using the Materials suggested. Dry MDF, laminated with 1/4" Drywall (via a Troweled on adhesive), and supported (Braced if you will...) with 7 "Top-to-Bottom"(ie: vertical) screwed in 2"x2"s will not warp, and the paint will not be affected any more than would be a House Paint applied to the area over a Fireplace. The screens surface, once cured, can be "Wet Wiped" clean with quick swipes with a slightly damp rag, so dust (...if not Soot, Heaven forbid!!!) accumulations can be kept at bay easier than a Fabric or Vinyl Mfg Screen under those circumstances.

There are other available routes to take, as in available surfaces as well as paint choices. Much depends on the answers I get to the questions I posed above. But no other material combo will come less expensive AND be specifically "engineered" for the application at hand than the "Construction materials" suggested in this post. You've got Lumens to work with, a inkling of Contrast (...that could use an assist....) and the smoothness of the "DLP" presentation to help out. All that needs to be done is to tailor make all the aspects of potential materials, equipment and room considerations into a well balanced solution.

No problemo as far as I'm concerned.

If done correctly and trimmed with a little thought toward cosmetics , an "Over the Fireplace" screen can both perform with excellence and look excellent as well.



..................but*




Those damn Vents are wieghing heavily on my mind. Don't let them become a "Spoiler"

OK. Cheap it will be. At least as cheap as possible.

In DIY, over the years I've /we've all seen many initiates express how whatever they were watching was so superior and so much bigger than anything they had before that they were satisfied with whatever they had "for cheap" and could not justify making changes....especially if it cost "Mo Money".

In this case, I'd estimate the expenses to be:

MDF $15.00

2"x2"s $15.00

2"x4"s $ 5.00

Drywall $5.00

1-1/4" & 2-1/2" Drywall Screws $9.00

DIY RS-MaxxMudd Mix $35.00

Painting supplies $15.00
(rollers - sanding sponge)

Total $99.00
( Velvet Wrapped MDF Baseboard Trim? add additional $35.00 )

If this "Guy" wants to maintain the potential of having the biggest 4:3 presentation possible (...seems obvious if he's been putting up with "Vents" within his image. )
then to do so using a base substrate larger than what can be obtained using a 4' x 8' sheet of something will require that the estimate be upped at least $60-70.00

At that "price Point" some larger 60" x 96 materials can be substituted for the 1/4" drywall. Trouble is, he'd pay a big premium to just gain an additional 2"-3" height from a 48" high material. "ANYTHING" used would require some type of special Paint to effect the kind of performance your (His?) situation as described above demands. But with only 55" of height to work with, I cannot really see where he has any valid argument about NOT going to a 16:9 format.

At least we have a semblance of the Lumens required to take the application into the next level. But I've also found Optoma's published Lumen specs to be at least 40% lower that stated, so we must consider allowing for that. Still no worries though, IMO

Let's see...., your going to be sitting approx 12' - 14' back from a screen location whose lower edge will start at 41" high. For "maxxed out" performance, having a 50" x 67" screen area would generate a 87" diagonal Screen. A darker RS-MaxxMudd mix would conserve and use the lumens provided more efficiently that a DIY Black Flame mix, but the newer version called Silver Fire might work even better at the appropriate hue/mixture. With either, anything except direct sunlight or direct bright incandescent will not fail to deliver an image that is entirely watch-able in the daytime or with "reading level" lighting at night.

If you want size combined with easy, some $$$ trade off is required because trying to "seam" any material necessitates time and effort dealing with that seam, and even more expense as far as the amount of lumber required to back that area. If your friend really new the score, and used his space to "BIGGEST" advantage, he'd go with a 48" x 85" screen, (98" diagonal @ 16:9) and although he'd lose only 2' in screen height @ 4:3, he'd gain 11" in width @16:9.

He's not going to have a bigger image otherwise, just one that avoids "Bars" in a 4:3 mode.

I guess at this point, a conversation between both of you needs to address the coming desire for him to "want" the best presentation possible, and be able to look to the future as well. And do it on a essentially reasonable budget. Or will he stick to his Guns and try to "upgrade" without doing so in a manner that will impress or satisfy no one but himself.

Harsh sentiment, that last....., but at any level, there should be a minimum effort and expense expected to achieve something worthy of note beyond a Hasbro "See & Show" projected onto a wall. (...yeah, I'm that old... ) If I was there...those damn vents WOULD be relocated if they 'could be' logistically. That frees up a ton of wall, and that nullifies the need for any additional substrate. Crap. The cost of refinishing the Wall surgery would be less than the expense he's facing if he elects to try to fill up that space with a maximum sized piece of material built out 2" from the wall.

Something must give, (height size) or the Budget/Work aspect must be advanced to acquire a decent outcome lest this become nothing more than an exercise in "Make do & gross Compromise".

No "Lump of Coal" in your AVS Stocking this!




I hope it gives you a good start. Of course it can be adjusted to create a 4:3 Format as well, but simple 'figrin' should show your friend that in the long and short run, he'll enjoy a larger image overall more often than not, and remind him that soon his Cable/Satellite will be broadcasting virually everything in a 16:9 format.

So tell him to "GET WITH THE PICTURE!!!"

Well Brian, in closing let me also suggest that you relate to him that the info he might get from any of us here on AVS' DIY Screens is given with his best interests in mind. For any DIY'er to suggest any course of action that was not intended to get something done, and done right, goes against the whole idea of having such a DIY Community. Cheap is good, but not at the "expense" of the bare minimum of quality. Yes, at times, one must accept less. But "Grates", No way Jose' !

In simple language.....; "We care, so we give." Pretty good sentiment at any time, but especially relevant given the Season at hand..

A little nudge. A couple of recent Threads concerning this application havegenerated a few PM'd requests for info.

Go to the thread's beginning

It certainly could not hurt you.


I'd need to know the quantities you used to make up the 1:1:1 mix, but for RS-MaxxMudd, all that is needed to get up to speed is Delta Silver Metallic and Water based Polyurethane (Satin) Adding a small amount of Antique Metallic Gold will also prevent/correct the slight push toward Blue the SM imparts to the White/Pearl mix.

Since your a "Roller", you most likely will not need to add any additional water. The POly will help the paint roll out smoothly. Just be sure you use good rolling technique because any such mix will tend to highlight errors such as Roller marks.




Sawrite. Here's a tip. Keep your Email program on with a "Compose Email" window engaged. After your finished with your Post, but before you hit "Submit Reply" , copy your text, paste it into the Composition, then hit "Spell Check". Afterwards, re-copy and re-paste back onto the Forum's Reply field and your reputation will remain intact.

(There used to be "Spell Check" as an option on here, but the new Format does not offer it. )

Yeah....I just tried it.

It must be White....bright White....to conserve light.




The SM was intended to increase Contrast "significantly" without crushing Whites & colors. It dates to 2004, when such was critical if one was to hold one's head up to those who claimed CRTs were the only "real' PJs worth having/looking at. What was (...and still is...) cool is that a Screen....(...and a DIY one no less...) a purportedly "passive" device, could be so essential and critical in delivering improved images from "Ho Hum" PJs. These days, it just makes a great PJ look even better, and helps avoid the over-use of CR Enhancement Circuits and Auto Lens Apertures.


The MinWax Poly yes,but the Delta and FolkArt paints no. They must come from a Michael's or Hobby Lobby, or any well stocked Crafts/Artist supply outlet.



Oh no problem! Many of those I help wind up being someone's patient.
Not sure how many because of a built in reluctance by many to admit to mental health issues.

Good luck.

A High Contrast paint will always show you what you missed.

Just be sure to let the paint dry completely before you try to sand.

Images would be nice.

It looks pretty darn good to me, but around here, some people judge smoothness at 100x magnification.

A Glassy Smooth surface will only come about via additional light, fine grit sanding then a final coat over that. You know when you've got it, because even dry, the surface feels cool...almost wet.

A light sweeping touch will tell the tale as long as visually you see no obvious blemishes. The surface should be smooth to the touch.....; if not indeed "Glass-like", at least somewhat slippery smooth as you move your "Palm' over it.... with no trace of fuzziness, or coarseness. If it meets those criteria your good to go. If not, sweep sand the entire surface with a "Fine to Medium" Grit Sanding Sponge. (...if "Medium" use lighter pressure and longer strokes...)

A "slippery surface" means a completely textureless final result. Just be sure to make the first two sprayed coats very thin, but evenly sprayed. (60% overlap on each Row) so they too act like a "Primer" to help hold onto the subsequently (and slightly) heavier coats.

Keep spraying on Thin coats only until you can see no more "White" and the entire screen looks uniformly covered. Obviously, if you reach the "No more White showing" stage but see any unevenness in the coat, you have to at least go one more coat to effect the even-ing up.

OK, somehow you started getting some texture build up? That comes from shooting too far away. If so, you can very lightly sand the affected coat and then top coat over it. Won't hurt a thing. Agressive sanding yes....very light sweep sanding no.

Waiting patiently for the next report.


PS,
That's one 'ell of a rough texture on that Ceiling!!!

The Pearl will not have the same degree of reflectivity or contrast enhancement as a well done Silver Metallic. And unfortunately your a bit mistaken about both the Colors, Flesh Tones, and the Viewing Cone. Absolutely Silver owns the trophy for delivering such things when used in it's pure state. As a Under Coating that is. White Pearl Metallic isn't in the same league. In fact, consider this. The use of white Pearl was only intended to introduce more Metallic Content without overtly increasing the attenuation the "Gray Element" existing in the Silver Metallic already exhibits. Using those paints is a delicate balancing act....so use a net...lest you fall down into a Pit of despair. We neither of us want that to happen.

Virtually all of those things above will instead depend upon the SF Surface coating. With SF, and at your Screen size you just don't really need a underlying reflective base to boost Contrast UNLESS your really after the epitome of Ambient Light performance. SF handles that aspect quite well by itself. Rather, you want a VERY reflective White Base. Minimally, it should be a bright, Flat White such as what you get with Kilz-2. Easier (...and even better....) is the Thrifty White Hardboard with it's ultra smooth Semi-Gloss White surface. Nothing but nothing can top a Mirror..........and what ever you've heard, or from whomever you heard it from to the contrary, the viewing cone of a SF/Light Fusion application is among the very best you can ever hope for, topped out only by a pure Matte White. And that by only about 10 degrees.


More disinformation. Although it was well intended, the "Ghosting" seen in just ONE member's test was due specifically to a "too Thin" coating of basic MMud, and the use of a CRT PJ. Even when aligned perfectly,(..as I'm sure they were...) the 3-lens system of a CRT does not match up well when it's surface focus point is compromised by returning light through a "too thin" Top coat. And where were those Ghosts spotted anyway? ONLY during a "Text Test" example, and only when compared to a flat white non-Fusion surface. Those "Halos" are never experienced by those who either have a Digital PJ, or CRT owners who get the amount (thickness) of the coating correct. One slightly skewered test does not warrant the determination that such a phenomena exists. To date, the existence of Ghosts (ing) is not a proven fact. Those who have actual full sized LF Screens know better. So "Boo-ya" t those Ghosts. (...now where did I put my Nuclear Particle Generator Gun?)



I would not bother. The White Pearl doesn't have enough "punch' by itself, and the Semi-Gloss Poly will have more of a muting effect than a enhancement effect when covered over with a darker SF Top Coating. What you really need is as bright a under layment as possible from the get go. A SF coating will most definitely attenuate the light as it passes through, so you don't want to add anymore attenuation by having the absorbed light hit anything else but a tight, non-permeable bright reflective surface. A 2nd Surface Mirror does slightly attenuate the light it receives very slightly, yet does so while reflecting far, far more of that attenuated light back into the surface image than anything else save Mylar. When the Top Coat is a darker Ambient Light mix such as Silver Fire, such attenuation serves to both deepen contrast because it (SF & a Mirror) attenuates darker light more than it does lighter waveforms, while NOT attenuating Colors and Whites as proportionately much so. The Mirror will accomplish that job best, and when that attenuated light re-fuses with the initial image, balanced saturation and subtle shadow detail is enhanced.




The original SM/MM actually performed that function better than any Gray screen had before it, because the White MMUd was so very translucent, allowing the absolute most gain to be had from the SM undercoating to be had, and subsequently all the other benefits that the SM brought into the equation.
The image below came from a Z1 w/only 600 mfg rated Lumens

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attac...2&d=1075472507

When 'on screen' Contrast is High, there is always a natural increase in ambient light performance. SM/MM bought that to the table. Too bad it was such a PITA to Roll. But actually, with the advent of the Wagner, and the ability to substitute the Behr SM with the lighter Delta SM, I'm most likely remiss in not ing a SSM/SFL Screen just to see how well it would fare against the recent Ambient Applications. Well, not really, because despite what it may seem otherwise, I'm a strong proponent for getting the best results possible in the easiest manner possible. Cheapest way too, BTW.
It's just a shame that you sometimes have to forgo one or more of the preceding to accomplish a specific goal. Even more a shame is that you won't do that by compromising known worrking methods and materials.




You asked.....so there it is. My advice is this. If using Silver Fire....or ANY such Ambient light mix, and your desiring the absolute best Ambient Light Performance....then bite down on your Lip and get a Acrylic Mirror. I see a significant difference (lessor) between the TWH base and a Mirror, and even more so with a basic Bright White Kilz -2 surface.

If the Mirror option (...about the same as a similar sized sheet of DW Laminate) is just too expensive, then all you have to do is get a sheet of TWH, squirt 3-4 coats of SF on it, and "ididit2" will have 'diditright".

This Thread contains lots of relevance in today's "metallic Reflective Screen" environment.

Hi Steve!

96" x 48" (cut to 85" x 48" = 16:9) is available almost at any Sheet Plastic Supplier. Plaskolite doesn't mfg the larger sizes anymore except on special order.

However, there is one location that is the exception. San Diego Plastics has 60" x 96" and 60" x 120" (2.35:1 material!) sheets of 1/8" Acrylic.

The larger sizes are worth the extra cost, which is surprisingly small. Shipping however will amount to about the same cost as the Sheet itself.

If you have to settle for a 98" diagonal image, just design your new Theater so that you sit a little closer on the front row. Close in (9'), a 98" diagonal appears the same size in comparison as a 120" screen from 12"-13' away.

Awwww.......don't go away! It's all good....and anything that can closely mimic a Mirror's reflectivity (...if not it's 1/8" clear depth...) is another alternative to the use of "hard to apply" metallic paint. That amounts to being "Mo Bedder".

I've had many the opportunity to see the difference there is when a Mirror is employed with either a White, Gray, or Metallic Based Gray Top Coat, as opposed to a "flat" (no depth) reflective surface. With a White or basic Gray top coat, the difference amounts to a substantial increase in 3-Dimensionality, or in even more descriptive terminology, an enhancement of apparent "curvature" and it's subtle shadow depth graduations.

A "Flat" metallic Gray surface, or one that is simply a "Bright Reflective White" that underlays a Top Coat is either helping to retain the screen's reflective intensity by offsetting absorption and attenuation (White) , and/or enhancing Contrast by maintaining the degree of Black Levels the PJ is producing (Gray). Basically, as stated before by myself and many others, this amounts to retaining (...or producing...) the "PoP & Sizzle" we so desire to see from "The Big Picture".

For those who desire / need a screen of gargantuan proportions...one that exceeds the size limitation of a Mirrored application, the use of a Silver reflective base under a White, or very light Gray Top Coat, offers the greatest potential improvement possible over any "Single coat" metallic paint application. The simple physics of having the added layered depth of a semi-translucent Top Coat, as well as the separate contributing layer of varying Reflectivity underneath, allows such a thin surface to create more of an appearance of "depth" than otherwise is possible.

However, and it seems almost silly to have to point it out, there will be no one who can ever paint successive layers of a Clear to a depth of 1/8" to equal the "Gap" between a true Mirrored surface and the reflective Top Coat. That being so, there will never be a Screen application with the ability to effectively duplicate ad/or match the potential and performance of a correctly done Light Fusion Mirror Screen application.

Everything else.....they are all resigned to being "almost are" and "just about as good as". The one thing that still makes all those other applications "all good" is just how very much improved many other DIY applications have become.

And as in so many other similar types of situations, what you haven't seen or experienced, you cannot then apply that lack of knowledge to a comparison of what is known to you. So.....if a UPW white Wall, or a Black Widow painted Board seems better than you could have hoped for, then you can maintain that equilibrium by not exploring "The Looking Glass" equation.

Because if you do take a peek into the Mirror, you'll get lost in a "Wonderland" of virtual reality.

I'm late....I'm late.......

Off with his head!