CMRA's S-I-L-V-E-R solution starts here:

Good to see you still respond to stimuli. It's an event in the making...but many are wanting, even expecting far more....from you at least. How about really obliging Tiddler's pleas with some newer and more extensive content?

Many will welcome the change. I'll be offering my own take upon my return.

Thanks CMRA. If I could quote Stuart from the Ameritrade commercial, "it's as easy as falling in love!"

However, I would be remiss in my report if I didn't stress that "it's simple" is really a function of preparation. As the old adage states, "build it three times; once in your mind, once on paper, and finally do the job." That said, the following points really helped out in this effort and I would encourage others to do the same:

1. Study the chosen approach in detail and ask clarifying questions. Don't assume much. The information in the forum, especially the specific help from MM, was of invaluable help. You'll see my line of questioning in the posts.

2. If using the Wagner, study up on it before starting. I know it's hard for us males, but read the manual. It's really not very long or complicated but helps to know the parts, how to setup, break down, trouble-shoot, etc.

3. MMs feedback on how to use the Wagner for this application was invaluable. I've attached the thread below. Read and study it if you are going to do this application:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=834442

4. Follow the recipe! I could of started with just the UPW surface, but am very glad I sprayed the Kilz2 primer on top of it. The finished sprayed texture of the Kilz2 was almost chalk-like and did an excellent job of adhearing the topcoat of faux glaze and Silver Metallic. I believe the UPW would of been too slick of a surface for good adhesion.

4. If using the Wagner, THIN IT OUT WITH WATER! Although CMRA used ~ 25% water, I probably used around 35-40%. That's just a guess. I simply tested with the viscosity tool until it ran through clean. The manual said the thinner the mixture, the finer the paint will spray.

5. In addition to thinning out the paint, the Wagner allows you to control the amount of material being sprayed by adjusting how deep you can pull back the trigger. The less material being dispersed, the finer the paint particles being sprayed (or so the manual states). Coupled with a very thin mixture, the spray mist was extremely fine and smooth ... I could tell that the Wagner would spit bigger pieces if I increased the amount of material being dispersed. As far as the setting, I probably was only dispersing the gun at 25% capacity by adjusting the knob that allows for how far back the trigger can be pulled.

6. BE PATIENT AND CONFIDENT THAT THE DUSTER TOPCOAT IS BEING SPRAYED. Enough said on this, but it really is critical.

7. Be diligent and break-down and clean-up before each coat. It's really not difficult to do ... The Wagner comes with 2 spray containers. I kept the paint in one and put hot soapy water in the other. After spraying a coat, I would detach the paint container, cover with tin foil, set aside, hook up the container with hot soapy water and spray 10 seconds or so to clean out. You then unscrew the nozzle, etc. and clean in soapy water, set aside and wait for the next job. By doing that, it keeps the Wagner operating on all cylinders and keeps the job clean. Again, follow the manual.

And of course there are more details but these seem to be the big ones. Just study and practice in your mind and anyone can do it. Heck, I just did!

8.

I did not lay down a solid coat of SM but rather sprayed 3 coats of the Kilz2/water over my existing Behr UPW and then followed with 7 duster coats of the Faux Glaze/SM/water concoction.

you are correct. replacing the behr sm with the delta sm results in a better overall finish. the result is a visual surface without the salt/pepper effect of visual artifacts due to darker (more lamp black) behr sm.

the screen ends up a ever so slighty lighter in color and with it a slight bit of additional gain.

MM will be showing the updated SILVER using delta's silver metallic within the next couple of days.

Guess there won't be a need for any timely bumps on the S-I-L-V-E-R thread for a while.


That assumes I have no other use for the SM. My wife and daughters already have plans for what I'll be painting. It truly is some neat stuff. And even if I didn't use all of it ... $15 bucks??? Guess I could stop drinking diet dew for a week. Thank goodness I only spent $35 on a 5'X10' 1/2" thick MDF board.


Huh? Salt and pepper effect? I know I'm a newbee, but is that something I should be seeing now? Cause the only thing catching my attention the past few days is some awesome pop and snap on my HD channels. I'm loving it!

Now that I have my screen that brings me enjoyment, pride and satisfaction, it's time to move on and become a productive member of society again. Thanks to all who humbly provided advice and encouragement. It was invaluable. I wish you all the best!

Vi ses sénare and Ha det så bra!!

Soon to come:

A minor readjustment of S-I-L-V-E-R to eliminate a few persnickity little "issues". The changes are intuitive, and totally in keeping with the concept of the original Mix.

Those being:

A degree of Darkness of the hue that does in fact crush whites a wee bit so that in a direct comparison to a pure white surface, such shows that the brillance has been lost in that specific range. You CANNOT adjudge such as happening without such a comparison, so that is only to S-I-L-V-E-R's credit. But in a comparison, the difference is there. The improvement also benifits color depth and subtle contrast.
(There's "PoP", then there's "PoPPy'er". Now there is PoPPiest.")

The issue of surface apperence involves not only cosmetics upon "up close" scrutiny, but on screen artifacts that appear during "panning" scenes within very light content. that is the ONLY time it is perceptable, and then only at viewing distances approaching a 1:1 ratio. But it is a potential issue with many now realizing that such "immersion" is now possible with HD material. Call it a slight "granularity", but it has never been detrimental, only observable. Of course I observe in the extreme, both in freqencey and size, but by my reasoning, if a screen surface can look invisible with a greatly expanded image at a distance much closer than 1:1, it stands to reason it will look better still at a distance more accepted as the norm.

Gain. The elusive Panacea to all our woes, and the object of our desires. It's significantly increased with S-I-L-V-E-R, but just as significantly increased even more "revamped" with the same amount of D

Application woes:
Even with the Wagner CS, a degree of care and patience extending beyond the norm is required. The Mica flake size and concentration of the Behr Silver Metallic is at issue here. I long have advocated it's use, as it is in virtually every mix I've created.
But I've never used it in excess because of it's dark hue, and only then because the Mica offset the gray.

cont.
. Stay tuned..

The deed is done. A small adjustment downward to 180" x 82" was made. That's still over 200" , ain't it?

Brightness? Well I'd say a plainly viewable image seen in a room lit by 1000 watts means lumens returned in a light controlled room are gonna be more than exceptable And dey is fer shur.

The Paint Solution was CMRA's S-I-L-V-E-R, slightly adapted by me to further increase gain. It consists of the folllowng readily available ingrediants.

1/2 gallon Behr Faux Glaze

4 oz. Delta Ceramcoat Silver Metallic from Michael's Arts & Crafts
(Substituted for the darker Behr Silver Metallic)

20 oz. Filtered Water

THAT'S IT !

The Wall was liberally primed with 3 rolled (1/4" Nap Rollers) coats of Kilz2.

The S-I-L-V-E-R was applied in 7 thin (Dusted) coats using the Wagner Control Spray electric HVLP Gun.

I'll post images later this evening of the complete process and Screenies in both dark and light conditions.

Even at 200" plus and with the Lamp's output on "Standard"the on screen image doesn't just "PoP", it sizzles! And its way Bigger'n even Clarence's 'ol Foolish 14' er

........and the viewing cone is a full 179 degrees !!!!!

All using a 27' throw! (double )
Simply put, if this DIY paint application is properly spray painted onto a "smooth" bright flat white surface, one can dispense with statements of the RS-1's inability to deliver a stunning image at extreme screen sizes.

MississippiMan never did listen much ta dem 'ol Naysayers dat sez, "Ya can't do that". NoSir! 2.35:1 is much 'Mo Bedder' when it's "Wall to Wall"

Wait'l ya see the screenies! All ya all is gonna drop yer draw'rs and do do.

Now then, I still need a good Anamorphic lens and carriage (manual) solution to consider.[/b]


Note: previously posted on DIY 2.35:1 CIH

OK, OK....so I had to sleep.

Here, before I start, is an explanation as to the "Salt-n-Peppa" reference that was made. PatWeber showed his proud Poppa colors in his response, and cannot be blamed one bit because S-I-L-V-E-R's performance is something to behold. I'm more critical than most, and a "detail-ist" to the extreme, as is PB_Maxxx, so Pat, you go on defending what you see as perfectly GREAT. 'Cause it is.

The Faux Glaze while acting as a suspending and glare muting agent for the silvered Mica lends a depth to the whole affair that allows one to see beyond and underneath the Mica particles, especially if the concentration of the Mica is sparse. Even after one has reached the 7th-8th coat, if you really REALLY try to notice, you can observe the screen's speckled appearance due to radical differences between the spots where the Mica is and is not. As stated before, this is apparent ONLY in the brightest content, and observable only under closer scrutiny.

This is the fine line you must not cross...to not try to get a surface that is completely coated with Silver Metallic. Or then, you have Hot Spotting, and a reduced viewing cone. and weirdly enough, an actual darkening of the image in some respects due to the reduction of effect from the underlying White surface.

The Behr SM has enough dull, black Mica particles in it to make possible to see 'em in areas where they land. With S-I-L-V-E-R, any such "dark" amongst the "light" is plainly seen upon close inspection.

I'm pretty damn sure CMRA used Behr SM because he had some around. Left over from eons past. He doesn't make many special trips to various stores. It (Behr SM) was the best choice among those SMs known at the time, and still is a good choice.

Strangely enough though, the darker Behr SM gives less boost to CR than the lighter Delta SM does, and while it significantly boost the depth and brilliance of the entire color spectrum, the amount of Gray hue it contains does slightly crush whites. This I believe because the concentration of Mica is greater in the Delta, while the overall hue of the Delta SM is lighter, so the good effects of Silver are retained and whites are even brighter while blacks still get a boost.

To get more gain from S-I-L-V-E-R without creating glare and adverse reflection was my goal. It has been accomplished.

In trying to create a DIY Screen at the most extreme of sizes, I also had to face the lumen output limitations of the projector of choice, a JVC D-ILA RS-1 (AVS acquired)

Just how big is a 16' x 92" screen area?

Way big.



Let's put some clothes on it, shall we?



Here you see a complete covering of "Slurry thin" Drywall compound spread out with a 1/2" nap 9" roller to get a perfectly uniform underlying surface when sanded out. This was the first time I tried this "common sense" method, or rather had "Juan Carlos" do it, my 'Oh so Trusty and Erstwhile Companion from El Salvadore. A truly meticulous fellow who only real fault lie in his competing with me for the beer supply.



Juan Carlos, my fellow AVS'ers. Give him his propers for doing 90% of the surface preparation.




Here are the Goodies needed to make the S-I-L-V-E-R XG Mix




Next is a movie of mixing the S-I-L-V-E-R XG that also shows how thin the mix must be to spray it through a HVLP gun.

OK. Here are sequenced photos showing appearance and surface texture in the 1st 3 coats of S-I-L-V-E-R HG in normal and Enhanced CR mode to show surface detail and Mica concentration

1st Coat



2nd Coat



3rd Coat



Finial (7th) Coat

Ahhhhhhhh.......but.

Always keep in mind the major limitation of both varieties of S-I-L-V-ER. significantly poorer Ambient Light performance.

Now candidly speaking, that aspect had me ignoring S-I-L-V-ER for a while, both because like CMRA, I too knew of it's potential and caveats (CMRA doesn't buy into "ambient issues") and the lack of flexibility of S-I-L-V-E-R in ambient light combined with the difficulty of spraying 7-8 ultra fine coats made me less than enthusiastic. Even CMRA, in his first postings, said:


Who among us DIY'ers want to hear that????? !!!!

But along came a Wagner and things changed quickly. All I had to do was to use the WCS a couple times and immediately the potential to spray just about anything came flooding into my mind. And among that flood was some flotsam called......S-I-L-V-E-R.

So now, even I can't deny the DIY masses with no Light Control issues the potential of S-I-L-V-ER in such applications.

So here my Friends is the proof that lies in the Pudding. And it's brought to you at 16' x 92" of splendid 2.35:1 Eye candy.

I'd go "Ape" for this Lady too.



Don't anybody pick your nose at S-I-L-V-E-R, lest all you come away with is greasy buggers.



And of course, for those who came late to the "Show' and have to crowd along the walls, theres still hope.




I have a bunch of shots taken when I compared S-I-L-V-E-R against straight primer, as well as a Silver Fire mix that also has the highest gain of any so far introduced. Even with that, in dark room performance, the S-I-L-V-E-R HG held it's own on all fronts, and clearly was the winner in the "Blazin' Whites" department.
heresy from the lips of one who hold the SF/BF concept near and dear to his heart and soul?

No way! I'm always for, and always have been supportive of whatever works best, and for dedicated Theaters, I'm sayin' it's back to the 'ol Mixin' Pots fer PB- & I. But don't dare doubt that when faced with such a challenge to "Go to the next Level" that newer and better things are in the offing. 'Cause they are. already. Nuff said fer now about that.

CMRA, I know you've said to me repeatedly, "Why fix it if it ain't broke?" I'm not sayin' that S-I-L-V-E-R in it's original form is busted with all this, but rather, consider this adaptation as the NO2 canister under S-I-L-V-E-R's hood.

Zzzooom!

Might be tough for that particular screen....I'm in Mississippi now, it's back in Livermore, CA

But.............., I have about a 1/2 gallon of Behr SM, and easy access to the Delta SM and the Behr Faux Glaze, I'm thinking..........., well why not have an example of both for my upcoming Multi-app presentation/comparison.

Contrasting screens indeed. I'll be sure to come up with something along the lines you've requested.

.... and next will be the ambient light tolerant version ?

Cretin! I hope ya step on a Sea Slug!



Actually, getting somewhere between a true Ambient light Mix, and a High Gain Silver solution like S-I-L-V-E-R and S-I-L-V-E-R HG is in the works. Can ya doubt it? PB_ is always a-mixin', and actually, we have something about to break that "almost" equals every aspect of S-I-L-V-E-R HG, and is far less involved as concerning the number of coats required, can still be "Mirror-ized" ala Light Fusion, and retains the "fine tuning" feature all the SF mixes posses.

So get a stick, scrape that slime out from between your toes, and squirt something on whatever you have, because IMO (offered as a once in a "blue moon" thing ) if you got a smooth surface, even a laminate, it can always be made "Mo Bedder". Significantly so.



I'll answer, and hopefully we'll hear from CMRA as well.

Tuning the Gray "downward" while boosting the silver by using a SM with smaller Mica Flakes is exactly what happened when the darker Behr SM was nudged over by the Delta SM.

But......................, the same advice originally given by CMRA still holds true. You do not want to use too high a concentration of Silver in the mix, and/or apply too many coats of either of the S-I-L-V-E-Rs or you'll wind up with a completely silver surface that is uncontrollable.

It's such a fine line between achieving gain and maintaining Contrast, and Silver solutions are as old as front projection. CMRA's S-I-L-V-E-R came closer than anything else ever has as far as utilizing Silver's benefits while avoiding the adverse attributes like Hot Spotting and narrow viewing cones. The ambient light high gain DIY screen solution, is just that, a solution that is already here, or is almost here. Maybe it will already be old news by the time you get back from the wilderness?

Maybe you otta take a Web-enabled cell Phone with ya?

Gain? I must use an estimate. Your seeing the first example on earth. But my guess is 2.0 minimum. I'm sure a defining test is in the offing soon however, for there are several souls on DIY Screens with both the time, inclination, and equipment to perform such a task. I choose to guess low, for if higher, redemption, not reproach can be in the offing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MM, this is from the other thread in DIY Constant Height. If you had a gain of 2, would you not say there is a viewing cone?

Also, to get to a gain of 2, you would require an awful lot of mica in the mix, or an awful lotta sheen. From what I can see, there isn't near enough mica to make a gain of 2. So, there must be a whole lotta sheen. And on a big screen like that, a big hotspot.

Either that or the gain is nowhere near 2. A simple test would confirm both gain and cone.

Also, S-I-L-V-E-R does remind me of the work I had done back in CGII. A nice white base with some silver metallic, clear coat and gold metallic.

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/...highlight=cgii

Do you need to apply 7 coats and would this work with a MITS. HD1000U projector?

.

You tell 'em, camera man.

As Proff55 related, it's not really about who gets there, got there first, it's about how well something works and how it can apply to the needs of the Members on this forum. Still, there are those who's work prefaced most of the continually evolving developments we are seeing currently on DIY Screens. To those Pioneers we all owe much. Sure, some of those applications were geared to PJ performance at the time, and some left so much to be desired that they never amounted to much as far as becoming widely accepted.

But even with all that, those efforts were the fodder on which truly interested and dedicated individuals have chewed on, and have drawn ideas and methods from, refining where possible, and re-creating where necessary. You can always tell the ones who give the past "icons" credit from those who conveniently leave the credit aside. The latter are the ones who brag the most about "My Mix is best".

It's "ALL GOOD" if you present it with the best interests of DIY'ers in mind. Personal plaudits coming from successful implementation of applications is where the REAL reward comes from. Such has always been true, and will always remain so.

The picture I posted above tells all, if you bother to examine it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The picture doesn't really show us anything about half gain viewing cone. The testing will show us. I hope you can share the results with us.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you see ANY hot spotting? I didn't think so. And after 7-8 built-up coatings, there is indeed a lot of SM related Mica in the surface paint, but it's not all on the top layer as in CGII, so it does a better job at reflecting light more evenly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, can't tell from the pictures. You can certainly see it in person. If you didn't, then I will believe you. Again, based on my experience, you still will not have enought mica in 7-8 coats to make a dent in gain. The gloss base, that the silver mica resides in, is what gives you the pop, not the silver mica flakes. I have done alot of testing with silver mica powders and I haven't observed any gain increase by adding more powder to the mix. Actually, the opposite, lower gain, is what I see.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "Cone" issue in proven. I believe I stated that a test for gain will confirm the specs. When that happens, we'll all know for certain. Until that occurs, I said I could only make an estimate. But try to extrapolate some common sense from what is being show. A 225" diagonal screen getting hit by at best 700 lumens. Do you think a 1.5 gain screen would do anywhere near as good a job as what is seen above?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, can't tell from the pictures. Only in person. So, if you can attest to the fact that there is quite a bit of gain, I will have to believe you.


Sorry, quotes aren't working for me. Neither is bolding, italics or underlining. So, this may appear a bit jumbled.

And as for baiting, that is not my intention. I would really like to have an intelligent discussion here with good facts and data. Pictures can only tell you so much. Measurements, can tell you a whole lot more.

I will be going out to get the materials for SILVER and dust it on and see if there is any truth to the hype. I gotta see it to believe it.

Todd,

Three absolutely essential aspects of S-I-L-V-E-R are the ratios of Silver Metallic to Faux Glaze, and the "gradual" building up of the layers of such a thinly mixed silver solution. The last one is the presence of a highly reflective White base (...ya gotta have it...) that also serves as a good 'sticking point" for which the thinned mix can adhere too.

Effective coverage of both the Gray hue element as well as the reflective properties of the Mica is obtained by virtue of it coming via the many sparsely coated layers. In this manner the reflective attributes of the Silver Metallic is held under control by dispersing the reflections far more diversely that what would happen if you rolled on the same or a similar mixture.

Now that having been related, is there the possibility that by altering the concept with additional 'extenders and bulking agents' that you could reach a point where the stuff could be rolled? Probably, but I cannot see you reaching the point of performance offered by the original S-I-L-V-E-R. And when anything close to S-I-L-V-E-R has been rolled, Hot Spotting and a horribly confined viewing cone resulted.

You like simple, and S-I-L-V-E-R is exactly that. If to add the possibility of rolling it on to the equation means the addition of more elements, or an additional "muting" step such as a dulling Top Coat, then any claim it has to being a simple solution goes flying south.

S-I-L-V-E-R is based upon known the issues and solutions to using a almost pure Silver surface for a screen. Only S-I-L-V-E-R does so by making the 'silver' be less reflective than it otherwise would be at that concentration. And that concentration is reached via many sprayed layers that are not "flattened out" in the manner rolling often results in. (more on this below)

When SM/MM screens were popular, they got their "ZING" from the base being pure, rolled on Behr Silver Metallic that was then coated with at least three very thin rolled coats of translucent MMud. That's not far away from what your considering, although the MMud was quite a bit denser than any "Clear Coat". The latter BTW was tried by a few back then to increase gain, as well as to reduce the component list, and the end results we never acceptable.

What your attempting will undoubtedly have gain, and bunches of it. But it will be a veritable "Spotlight" blasting back toward the light source, compared to S-I-L-V-E-R which has virtually no viewing cone restriction at all, yet delivers considerable gain equally across the surface. By the time you have done whatever it takes to mitigate the excessive glare rolling might induce, the performance will suffer a huge drop due to the mica still being "flattened" but effectively muted equally. It still might result in a very nice image with plenty of "PoP", but it won't be an easy solution, nor something that cannot be bested by easier done methods.

Or so I suppose, for I sure haven't "been there, done that" myself. If I was to a try it however, I'd apply a idea such as yours with a High Nap Roller, one specifically made for rough surfaces, so the surface of the paint would wind up having a degree of texture.

Yes, in this instance, you go back to texture being the key to defusing the intensity of the reflection off the surface. Combine that with a "slight muting" effect from the addition of a matte Poly and you might wind up with a acceptable result. Or even a real bang up improvement over previous "Rolled On" applications. It's a unknown, but by virtue of past "less than acceptable' results from very similar undertakings, the odds are not especially favorable. But when were the "Odds" a concern to "Todd" eh? All you can do is give it a go, and if success follows, it's only "All Good", I'd venture to say.

Lastly, in respect to S-I-L-V-E-R being used to upgrade a matte white Screen, that not only should work, it's being done already. But what is an improvement over matte White, when applied over a matte White alone, does not represent what S-I-L-V-E-R can be when applied over a more ideally suited surface. As stated before, S-I-L-V-E-R's performance relies upon the thinness of the coats and the arrangement / ie: lack of alignment of the Mica particles, properties that allow plenty of light to reach the underlaying ultra bright white base. I did not say "Gloss" or "Matte", but ultra bright white. As we both discussed on another thread, a good multiple coating of primer provides more reflectivity that a matte surface by virtue of the primer being more densely packed with White elements. This was apparent in your own tests where just the substitution of such a primer resulted in performance almost identical to that of a solution that required a reflective Top Coating to be slightly brighter.

It might just however make a 1.3 to 1.8 gain White screen deliver exceedingly more "PoP" though, so I'd say yes to the basic premise of your question above.

Keep it simple, but if your going to try to re-invent the wheel so as to make it more accessible to the "Rolling Crowd', don't up the complexity by adding more "cogs and sprockets" that are only there to smooth out the flat spots on the "New Wheel". I'd instead concentrate on duplicating exactly what S-I-L-V-E-R does, using as close to exactly what S-I-L-V-E-R is, but try to come up with a rolling method that delivers just enough texture to defray hot spotting.

I'm thinking about the old Dry Rolling method that was about the only really successful method of rolling on Silver Metallic. Multiple coats using a 1/2" nap roller, or even a Faux Texture roller

Hey! They use exactly that to apply Faux Glaze....don't they.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.................?

No matter what, you go there, do that, and report back your findings. I for one hope there is some degree of success. But my strong recommendation is to keep texture and sparsely laid down coats at the forefront of your application method.