Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.

Fixing my failed wall screen attempt for friend....Got It!

920 Views 12 Replies 5 Participants Last post by ziggyr, Feb 21, 2005

RonF

Discussion Starter · Feb 17, 2005

My first attempt I jokingly dubbed "White Fusion" or just a hellova lot of silver failed for two reasons. One, using gloss white paint under the SMMMUD topcoats. Gloss sucks for painting over. Two, using all that Behr SM in it. Other than that it was great. HA!

OK, went back to my 2' x 4' sample board last night and wet sanded down to smooth the whole mess I had tried to duplicate so that I could test next to my 1.7 white Goo wall. Once I had it smooth, I wanted the brightest flat white I could get under the top coats so not needing primer this time around, I used 2 coats of UPW flat. When that was dry I brought it in to compare to Goo wall. Yep the sample is white alright, but definitely looks like 1.0 gain next to 1.7. So still felt good about all that effort a couple of years ago.

Next I rolled the standard 1 quart each mix of Deep Base, UPW and *** for the MMUD for the first coat. Dried it with the nice little high powered heat gun I mentioned in the other thread. It seems to me that if you keep it moving but close and hot, it actually seems to help level out any rolling texture. Once dry I was anxious to put the original MMUD mix next to the Goo to see what my observations were on its gain. 1st observation was that the MMUD mix with the UPW undercoat was actually a whiter white than the CRT white of the Goo, by a noticeable little bit. While running a variety of scenes & freeze frames from the excellent transfer of The Rock (Criterion Collection) I could see an almost seamless likeness of the colors and detail between the two surfaces. Gotta love whites in that regard. I could also see that the standard MMUD mix did not have as much gain as the 1.7 Goo mix (calculated from a mix of approx. 60% 1.3 CRT White and 40% 2.1 of the old high gain version). I would estimate the standard MMUD at around 1.3 or 1.4.

As I had bought an additional quart of *** just for experimenting with slightly higher concentrations, I went back with my sample and mixed in an additional 8 more ounces of the *** into the original batch. When that was dry I took it back in to compare again. Man, I love it! I'm not sure what MMAN means by possibly softening the picture if you use more than the standard 1 quart. With a DILA pixel structure, that is how I focus.....get up real close to the screen and work the focus until I see that nice sharp tiny outlines on the pixels real sharp. Not a problem at all.

With that extra 8 oz of *** the sample looks now identical to the gain and colors of the 1.7 white Goo. But it's slightly different in two subtle, possibly better ways. 1. The Goo has more noticeably those little tiny shiny silver particles, while the hotter MMUD mix seems to have the same gain in a smoother, more subtle way. If you put your eyes up next to it you definitely see a kind of the same shimmer but it's just smoother, I guess because there's no particles or mica in it. 2. Maybe I wanted to believe this was so, and it was very subtle as well, but the MMUD white mix seemed to have a tiny bit more contrast to it. The darks seemed just a little darker with the same amount of detail.

Anyway, not an ounce of bad side effects as far as I could tell, and it looks awesome. I'll be redoing his wall a week from this Friday.

See less See more

Save

Status: Not open for further replies.

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

ziggyr

· #2 · Feb 18, 2005

Glad to see you got some results Ron! This *** still has me intrigued. Looking at the formula specs. doesn't really tell me much. I am presuming that the gain from the *** is due to the fact that it is glossy?????

Ron, can you do me a favour?.......if you paint a small sample of *** on top of white paint, card, does it appear glossy/milky?

Save

RonF

Discussion Starter · #3 · Feb 18, 2005

Quote:

Originally posted by ziggyr
Glad to see you got some results Ron! This *** still has me intrigued. Looking at the formula specs. doesn't really tell me much. I am presuming that the gain from the *** is due to the fact that it is glossy?????

Ron, can you do me a favour?.......if you paint a small sample of *** on top of white paint, card, does it appear glossy/milky?

OK, just did that. On a white portion of a leftover Christmas card and on an inch and a half of the bottom corner of the 2' by 4' sample I was testing and reporting on. It appears both glossy and milky when on top of a surface, about the shade of....well...a pearl. Just did it with a brush so not real uniform. Certainly it's semi translucent. When on the top of the sample panel which has it mixed into the coatings and is very white from the UPW, by itself the *** is not nearly as white. Cool stuff, though. You wouldn't want to project directly onto it as a topcoat. It's pretty reflective. I don't know if the gain inducing properties are necessarily from that though. Someone else had mentioned it was from the ingredients in it. Mixing plain glossy paint into the mix would not have the same effect.

See less See more

Save

ziggyr

· #4 · Feb 18, 2005

Thanks for doing that Ron. Looks like the *** ingredients will remain a mystery. I wonder what the reflective component is?.......if not mica, it has to be something similar OR Behr have omitted the mica content in the list of ingredients???

I was hoping Mississippiman would have provided an answer to the mystery question.

Save

MississippiMan

· #5 · Feb 18, 2005

I did. You missed it on the other thread when I stated that it's a combination of ingredients that do the trick.

.....and just reading the ingredients tell you what you need to know.

Reread, and it should become clear that the components themselves, when mixed, produce the sheen, and the colorant produces the color.

There are Polymers in the equation. And Glycol. (antifreeze -like crap) Greasy, slimy stuff that helps make it become reflective stuff. It's not magic, and Behr isn't hiding any information.

Just use it, don't abuse it. If you need some because it seems impossible to find locally, you have options.

Otherwise, hit a Interior Decorator establishement and ask the right question. "Where can I find a Faux White Pearlescent paint?"

See less See more

Save

garyfritz

· #6 · Feb 18, 2005

ziggyr, MMan did provide an answer, here -- he said "it's the combination of the Glycol and Acrylic Polymer that gives the pearlescence it's shiney glow." (EDIT: Whoops, MMan beat me to it, ohwell)

I'm thinking it may be a similar effect to what you see in some pricey shampoos. They have an opalescent look to them, but obviously there's no mica. Just some chemical property that reflects light like that.

Ron, thanks for reporting on your tests! So it sounds like even for your D-ILA you like MMud without SM better -- and you like MMud with extra *** even better. How much MMud did you mix the 8 oz *** into? Was it a full 3 qt batch, so you increased the *** level by 25%, or was it part of a batch so you increased it more than that?

I like the idea of the higher pearlescence causing higher and smoother gain. MMan, do you see any problem with the higher *** level?

Gary

See less See more

Save

MississippiMan

· #7 · Feb 18, 2005

Wow Gary,

Your on the ball and right on target. I had to go back to find that quote to re-edit it in and in the time it took for me to post, and then fetch & return, you aced it.

Thanks! Back Up is a wonderful thing.

Save

MississippiMan

· #8 · Feb 18, 2005

Quote:

Originally posted by garyfritz

I like the idea of the higher pearlescence causing higher and smoother gain. MMan, do you see any problem with the higher *** level?

Gary

In the past, a 1: 1: 2* MMud mix (****) produced hot spotting and a distinctly more fuzzy image. That was a 50-50 mix.

There could be, and obviously is a happy medium in there somewhere, probably at 35 to 40% at most. After that, the *** starts to overwhelm the "Flat' aspect of the mix.

YOU DO NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN, PEOPLE!

My experiments with adding SM for reflectivity are grounded in caution.

Yet some with a more daring nature,have ventured well beyond my recommendations, and a few of their results have cause me to take pause and rethink set standards.

Those whose experimentation involves the addition of more *** than is normally called for, do so in the spirit of adventure, and at their own risk as well. But what drives me is the realization that if I hit the nail on the head, when the PJ goes on, the thrill comes on too.

See less See more

Save

RonF

Discussion Starter · #9 · Feb 18, 2005

Quote:

Originally posted by garyfritz

So it sounds like even for your D-ILA you like MMud without SM better -- and you like MMud with extra *** even better. How much MMud did you mix the 8 oz *** into? Was it a full 3 qt batch, so you increased the *** level by 25%, or was it part of a batch so you increased it more than that?

I like the idea of the higher pearlescence causing higher and smoother gain. MMan, do you see any problem with the higher *** level?

Gary

I'm still curious about a little bit of SM added in (not the insane level of my scrapped attempt for friend) to help with contrast on these G-series DILA projectors. However when I redo his wall, at the same time unbenownst to his "significant other" (another $550 expenditure).....he's going to install a brand new lamp from Atlas Specialty Lighting's Cermax line, which will be a ton brighter than the old worn out one was. I was told that spare lamp had less than 100 hours and thus calculated it at around 500 when I took it out. But Ralph at Atlas today told him the lamp had a 1998 date on it so who knows how many hours really? It was shot! He'll be able to explain the extra brightness by the "white" screen formulation replacing the very gray one all the Behr SM created. Good thinking huh? Just like "they" never seem to notice one additional "black" box in the equipment stack.

Note.....I did swing by a Modern Masters distributor however to check out their silver metallics which are formulated the same way as Behr with the mica particles and came away with this observation: Their Silver doesn't seem quite as dark as the Behr. Hard to tell in the bottle if it's just as shiny? However, and I bought an 8 oz bottle of it, they also had a "Platinum" color which was even a shade lighter than their "Silver". HMMM....maybe a way to add in that little "extra" gain without graying the mix quite as much? I'm going to fart around with it on my test piece with small quantities added in on the "enhanced" MUD mix and see what that looks like.

Bottom line for me is that to change my wall I would have to trash like $250 worth of the price of the GOO primer and topcoats and all that labor I originally did on the wall. And then do it all over again.

Gary to answer your question about the 8 oz additional ***, it was added back into the original 1 qt, 1 qt, 1 qt MUD mix after enough had been poured out to roll a 2' x 4' section on my sample. So a slightly heavier concentration than if it had been added into the mix at the outset. After reading MMAN's response this morning, I may even add another 2 oz of it into that same mix to test what a 3rd coat rolled onto my sample would then perform like.

See less See more

Save

ziggyr

· #10 · Feb 21, 2005

Guys, thanks for the update on the ingredients in ***. So, I was correct in assuming that *** is a glossy/semigloss paint tinted with a bit of white??

Mississippiman, I use a large screen (painted wall) in my home theater and sit reasonably close to it (unavoidable). In the past I have found that using relective paint mixes (gesso + mica ) result in a noticeable light drop off to the edges of the screen.

I am hoping that the 1.5 gain of MMUD will not cause this?

How effective is MMUD in creating an even edge to edge illumination yet still have gain?

Save

BudBray

· #11 · Feb 21, 2005

Quote:

Originally posted by ziggyr
Guys, thanks for the update on the ingredients in ***. So, I was correct in assuming that *** is a glossy/semigloss paint tinted with a bit of white??

Mississippiman, I use a large screen (painted wall) in my home theater and sit reasonably close to it (unavoidable). In the past I have found that using relective paint mixes (gesso + mica ) result in a noticeable light drop off to the edges of the screen.

I am hoping that the 1.5 gain of MMUD will not cause this?

How effective is MMUD in creating an even edge to edge illumination yet still have gain?

Hi Ziggy. I am presently using a Silver Metalic base with MMud on top as my screen. I haven't noticed any drop off on the edges. I posted 2 new pics with a paper covered mirror to see the diff. One shot is straight on and the other is close up at 45 angle. I don't notice any drop off. This is satndard MMud over the SM base without anything between. As for the gain value, they say it's 1.5 so if it is, great. It looks good to me.

Bud

See less See more

Save

MississippiMan

· #12 · Feb 21, 2005

Quote:

Your hopes are your reality. MississippiMud all by itself is a terrific screen application. It has such an extreme Viewing Cone, that it is safe to say instead that it actually has NO viewing cone.

Illumination across the surface is virtually equal. At least to the point trying to find the discrepency would be redundant.

Here is one extreme example;

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...waysslinky.jpg

...........and another one that is "Non-Digitally" created.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...ussideways.jpg

And the next one? Well, it just "Eye candy", that's all that can be said about it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...mowakesDad.jpg

See less See more

Save

ziggyr

· #13 · Feb 21, 2005

Yep.............looks pretty good to me!!

Save

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.

Top Contributors this Month