Black Widow PFG - the Discussion - Black Widow

[muzz]

I tried to have SW match a pretty decent sized brick chip, and they came out with the most god awful match I've ever seen, soI took that sample card, and I grabbed a bunch of cards off the rack that looked closer, and went BACK to the site I was trying to match(building brick), and it was WAY different than what they had selected.....

I don't have alot of faith in them since then....

[Harpmaker]

muzz wrote:

I tried to have SW match a pretty decent sized brick chip, and they came out with the most god awful match I've ever seen, soI took that sample card, and I grabbed a bunch of cards off the rack that looked closer, and went BACK to the site I was trying to match(building brick), and it was WAY different than what they had selected.....

I don't have alot of faith in them since then....

OK, SW sucks at color matching fabrics and brick chips - got it. Does anyone know how they are at matching actual paint samples? I will say my confidence in them is shaken and about to fall.

[mechman]

I have to admit, Lowe's is my store of choice these days. They're very knowledgeable there. I know someone who just became Paint Manager at a Home Depot (wife's cousin's husband). He just took all their courses and I asked a few simple questions and he couldn't answer them. I'm sure we all have experiences with certain stores. I know the fellas working at my Sherwin Williams weren't the brightest bulbs but they seemed like they knew how to work their spectro.

mech

[wbassett]

My preference is Lowes too. They have a Matchrite which is made by Xrite... and they have the most complete color library of any place I checked.

My bet would have been on Sherwin Williams since they are a dedicated paint store, so that was a surprise. Benjamin Moore and PPG though should be more accurate than even Lowes at color matching.

Home Depot is only a couple notches about True Value when it comes to color matching in my opinion. Home Depot doesn't have a complete color library and a lot of the times the techs aren't paint techs and only know how to run the machine to match existing Behr or Glidden colors. That's not really a match as much as it is a close match to an existing color. They do have the ability to color match, I'm just saying YMMV as far as if the tech knows how to do it.

I personally like the option of being able to access a very large color library, but not everyone may have a Lowes around.

[Harpmaker]

I thought there was some question about the compatibility of Lowe's Valspar bases with HE558. Something about them pushing blue if I remember right. Has this been proven true or false?

[mechman]

Harpmaker wrote:

I thought there was some question about the compatibility of Lowe's Valspar bases with HE558. Something about them pushing blue if I remember right. Has this been proven true or false?

It was pure speculation on my part. That's why I picked up the Winter Mist there last week. To test this. Where was your Winter Mist from Harp? I know that it was more dead on neutral than my Winter Mist mix was.

I'll try and get my sample mixed up this week and tested. I do need help remembering the things I promise! It seems like just when I get my head above water a big box from Elite Screens shows up on the doorstep!

So I've got a review to do of Elite, more mixing of Auto Air, more testing of Black Widow, and .... anyone else?

mech

[Harpmaker]

mechman wrote:

It was pure speculation on my part. That's why I picked up the Winter Mist there last week. To test this. Where was your Winter Mist from Harp? I know that it was more dead on neutral than my Winter Mist mix was.

By "your Winter Mist" do you mean the last batch you got from Lowe's?

My first quart of Winter Mist came from my local True Value store. It was what I used to make up my test batch of WM/HE558 5:1.

The readings (RGB values) you got from my samples were:
True Value Winter Mist: 226-223-224
WM/HE558 5:1 mix: 194-195-194

The Lowe's Winter Mist measured 218-221-222 and I haven't made a HE558 mix with it yet.

When I painted the samples to send to you I noticed that the True Value WM appeard to have a reddish hue when I compared it to known neutral grays, which your measurements proved to be the case, but only slightly. The Lowe's WM, while it appeared to match the neutral grays better, is actually the tiniest bit on the blue side. When the two WM paints are compared side-by-side the True Value mix seems to be off-color towards red, which I mentioned to you and Bill via PM. It's strange how it produced a HE558 mix that is almost dead-on neutral.

I'd like to take a moment to examine the two WM paints above. When viewed by themselves both paints seem to be gray. It's when they are compared to each other, or a neutral gray, that a very viewable difference can be seen.

The True Value WM RGB values only differ 3 points. The Lowe's WM values only differ 4 points. The two together differ only 2 points in the Blue and Green values (a very close match), but they differ 8 points in the Red value. I think I'll mix the two WM's together and see how it averages out. In theory, it should be about dead-on neutral.

BTW, all my HE558 mixes were measured to the milliliter using syringes.

All this reminds me of something a friend told me years ago. He was the head of the lamp division (light bulbs) of Westinghouse. I sure wish he was around today, he could answer a lot of questions I have about DIY screens and projectors. Sadly, he passed away. Anyway, he told me that the human eye is very poor at determining colors with no reference point (which is why we can watch gray screens, all the colors are relative. ), but that when comparing two colors the human eye can discern very minute differences in shade and hue.

[wbassett]

Harpmaker wrote:

All this reminds me of something a friend told me years ago. He was the head of the lamp division (light bulbs) of Westinghouse. I sure wish he was around today, he could answer a lot of questions I have about DIY screens and projectors. Sadly, he passed away. Anyway, he told me that the human eye is very poor at determining colors with no reference point (which is why we can watch gray screens, all the colors are relative. ), but that when comparing two colors the human eye can discern very minute differences in shade and hue.

Absolutely true. That's why I said when testing screens, they should be tested against a known performer that's the same (or very close) shade.

[mechman]

Harpmaker wrote:

By "your Winter Mist" do you mean the last batch you got from Lowe's?

I had two different Winter Mist's - one from True Value and one from Lowe's

Harpmaker wrote:

My first quart of Winter Mist came from my local True Value store. It was what I used to make up my test batch of WM/HE558 5:1.

The readings (RGB values) you got from my samples were:
True Value Winter Mist: 226-223-224
WM/HE558 5:1 mix: 194-195-194

The Lowe's Winter Mist measured 218-221-222 and I haven't made a HE558 mix with it yet.

Mine came in something like yours but a bit darker... 216 218 219 if I recall correctly - I'd have to search the pms to find it. I've done nothing with it since I've measured it either. Just sittin' in it's can.

Harpmaker wrote:

When I painted the samples to send to you I noticed that the True Value WM appeard to have a reddish hue when I compared it to known neutral grays, which your measurements proved to be the case, but only slightly. The Lowe's WM, while it appeared to match the neutral grays better, is actually the tiniest bit on the blue side. When the two WM paints are compared side-by-side the True Value mix seems to be off-color towards red, which I mentioned to you and Bill via PM. It's strange how it produced a HE558 mix that is almost dead-on neutral.

Outside of my WhiBal card I do not have a neutral gray reference right now. I could punch the numbers in BabelColor and compare them though.

Harpmaker wrote:

I'd like to take a moment to examine the two WM paints above. When viewed by themselves both paints seem to be gray. It's when they are compared to each other, or a neutral gray, that a very viewable difference can be seen.

The True Value WM RGB values only differ 3 points. The Lowe's WM values only differ 4 points. The two together differ only 2 points in the Blue and Green values (a very close match), but they differ 8 points in the Red value. I think I'll mix the two WM's together and see how it averages out. In theory, it should be about dead-on neutral.

BTW, all my HE558 mixes were measured to the milliliter using syringes.

Store variance. And to think I measured using cups! :raped: Well your Black Widow came out better than mine!

Harpmaker wrote:

All this reminds me of something a friend told me years ago. He was the head of the lamp division (light bulbs) of Westinghouse. I sure wish he was around today, he could answer a lot of questions I have about DIY screens and projectors. Sadly, he passed away. Anyway, he told me that the human eye is very poor at determining colors with no reference point (which is why we can watch gray screens, all the colors are relative. ), but that when comparing two colors the human eye can discern very minute differences in shade and hue.

Amen!

mech

[jegyed]

mechman wrote:

Both Bill and I have been unable to find a 'suitable' mate for Black Jack. Everything tried so far has pushed blue. And then the fact that it is discontinued. And I have no more to test. I wouldn't recommend it. Stick with HE558.

mech

Wish I read this before I got to impatient and purchased a 5 gallon bucket of BlackJack at Lowes. They at least marked it down for me because it was the last one. Back to HD to order a gallon of 588. May just do the SW grey for now.

[mechman]

jegyed wrote:

Wish I read this before I got to impatient and purchased a 5 gallon bucket of BlackJack at Lowes. They at least marked it down for me because it was the last one. Back to HD to order a gallon of 588. May just do the SW grey for now.

Was it the actual water based version? We've only found it at Walmart.

mech

[jegyed]

Harpmaker wrote:

To be fair, fabric can be tougher to match than a flat paint. I do understand though.
The offer still stands.

Before you drive all that way to the True Value store, make sure you have the formula for Winter Mist with you! Some stores don't have it, or look up the wrong tint values (been there! ).

WQ

[jegyed]

The blackjack is water based however it the label says "gel paint". This is to keep the aluminum suspended. That could be an issue.

[mechman]

jegyed wrote:

The blackjack is water based however it the label says "gel paint". This is to keep the aluminum suspended. That could be an issue.

Bill - did your can say this?

mech

[wbassett]

I say take it back to Lowes and get your money back, unless you were planning on using the other 632 ounces for something else , in which case keep it for that.

I'm not really sure what you got. What does it say on the side as far as the product #? What I was using was just a general purpose water based aluminum paint.

Mine is High Reflectance All Purpose Aluminum Paint #5168
Contains

• Resin
• Mineral Spirits
• Aluminum
• Water

How much did it cost? Here it's $55 for a five gallon bucket.

[jegyed]

The product is "BlackJack Aluminum Roof Coating #71"
" The Best and Brightest etc..." I double checked and it is water based. The price at Lowes is $37.50, but the department manager told me that sales were slow so they were going to discontinue it at this store. He gave it to me for $17.00 to get rid of it, so taking it back is not much of an option for me.

[wbassett]

$17 wasn't that bad then.

I do believe that has fibers in it too, maybe not though, I couldn't find #71 on their website either. Usually roof coatings do have other things in it in addition to just the binder, water, and aluminum.

You might be able to find something that works with it, but honestly we would have no idea what to use as a base since we have no data on it. If it's anything like the other aluminums, you'll want to use a warm white, but I can't promise how it will turn out. Look at it this way, you have more than enough to play with until you find the right combination

[benven]

<^..^>Smokey Joe wrote:

Good question.

With a 0.8~1.2 screen it is unlikely to see much difference, however moving further away either direction and you alter the "L" in Lab enough so that the light that scatters more readily,ie Blue end of the spectrum, will behave differently than the Red end of the spectrum, then the ab functions may drift when viewing off axis.

We are looking uniformity across the width here.

Not to nit pick. But 0.8-1.2 is a 50% difference in gain!! That alters L alot. If we say unity gain +/- 5%, that would make more sense to me. That isn't too difficult to hit. It just seems pointless, to me, after doing all that work to get a neutral gray that you would ruin it with such a gain spread.

[benven]

On another note, what is the difference between using aluminum flakes and the silver mica flakes that I have been using? I easily attained a neutral, or really close to neutral, paint mix with them.

[mechman]

benven wrote:

On another note, what is the difference between using aluminum flakes and the silver mica flakes that I have been using? I easily attained a neutral, or really close to neutral, paint mix with them.

Well you're main mix doesn't seem to have little prisms in it like the pearls and what not I've seen. Proof was in the magnification! Haven't seen teh topcoat yet though. I am a bit wary of it. But I also trust you.

Personally I like your mix! And I even recommended it elsewhere to the lower lumen crowd. I think that CGiv and the Black Widow compliment each other nicely here! I think of CGiv as kind of a SILVER killer. Maybe we should move this conversation to the CGiv thread though!

And I really really really will get around to testing gain. But first I gotta figure out how exactly. With my spectro that is. But Sunday is the Super Bowl and we have guests coming and I also have a 92" Elite Silver Frame screen sitting in a box in my office that I have to review. And then hopefully box it back up and give it away to a member.

mech

[tradewinds]

Would that member be me

[wbassett]

benven wrote:

On another note, what is the difference between using aluminum flakes and the silver mica flakes that I have been using? I easily attained a neutral, or really close to neutral, paint mix with them.

From what I see you're only using .27 ounces of the Pearl Silver for a quart of the main mix. That's why you don't see a color shifting. That's less than 1% of the entire main mix. The other 'popular' pearl/poly topcoating mix uses 2-4 ounces of craft grade mica. That's 6-12% of the entire mix, and a significant difference. And if you agree that is a big difference, BW PFG uses a whopping 20% of the aluminum component for a 40oz mix. I'm positive if we had 20% mica/pearl in any mix it would be unwatchable.

As far as aluminum over mica- One is a non-interference, the other an interference method, which is another factor and why I was so interested in it.

With lighter colors micas are a bit more forgiving but color shifting is still there. When things go darker color shifts are more apparent.

With just a 10X magnification the color separation is easily seen with Jacquard Pearl-Ex Silver.


This is just a fact of what mica (pearls) do. It's why they are used by artists. Non-interference materials are opaque and do not allow light to pass through them, so the light is not refracted. Mica is a trade off that's been used for years. It makes for a brighter image, but causes color shifting. Aluminum (non-interference) also creates a brighter image but doesn't have the classice mica rainbow color shift effect.

benven wrote:

Not to nit pick. But 0.8-1.2 is a 50% difference in gain!! That alters L alot. If we say unity gain +/- 5%, that would make more sense to me. That isn't too difficult to hit. It just seems pointless, to me, after doing all that work to get a neutral gray that you would ruin it with such a gain spread.

Unmolested neutral gray in a flat or matte finish is naturally around a .8 or lower gain depending on how dark of a shade it is. Going from .8 to .9 is pretty easy. Getting to 1.0 from say a .8 surface gain starts to have an effect on things, but still not enough that the average person would notice. Going from .8 to 1.2 and the viewing cone not only starts to become noticeable, but specular gain starts to overtake the native 'gain' of the shade of gray alone. Once you breach a .5 increase in gain viewing cone starts to drop faster and off axis color shifting becomes more apparent unless careful steps are taken to counteract the color shift. There are no known steps that can compensate for viewing cone as gain goes up, well not totally true... that's when a torus screen comes into play... It is however true when it comes to flat screens.

[Harpmaker]

I have a question about the prism effect of mica: Since my PJ only has red, green and blue filters on the color wheel, in theory (there's that word again ), I shouldn't see any prism effect even if it is present because no "white" light is hitting the screen.

Do most of the more expensive, or better, PJ's have a white (or clear) section on their color wheels that this is so important?

[wbassett]

Harpmaker wrote:

I have a question about the prism effect of mica: Since my PJ only has red, green and blue filters on the color wheel, in theory (there's that word again ), I shouldn't see any prism effect even if it is present because no "white" light is hitting the screen.

Do most of the more expensive, or better, PJ's have a white (or clear) section on their color wheels that this is so important?

Even with a DLP that just has an RGB color wheel, it is additive color. All colors combined create white in an additive color system. With paints it's a subtractive system and when you add all colors you get black.

Rarely does a projector put out just one of the primary colors. It is creating a complex image of light and colors created from the primary colors in the color wheel or the LCDs in an LCD projector. When light is refracted, it is broken back down to it's individual colors, hence the rainbow prism effect happens. I'm not being argumentative at all, this is the nature of mica is all.

Iridescent materials are covered in detail here.

There are also different grades and quality of mica, which also are a factor. Lower grade mica/pearls tend to have less consistancy between flake sizes, thickness, density of how many flakes per bottle... lots of variables, but they all do have a common characteristic...

Aluminum is a non-interference that is also very bright and reflective, which is exactly what sparked the interest in using it. We can go darker in shade, add more aluminum, and still maintain whites, blacks, and color reproduction.

[Harpmaker]

Thanks for the reply Bill. I want to be clear that I'm not being argumentative either, really, I'm just trying to understand this correctly.

Great treatise on iridescence!

Perhaps Texas Instruments is simplifying the matter too much, but their explanation of how a single-chip DLP projector works ( http://www.dlp.com/tech/what.aspx ) says, in both text and graphic, that the DLP chip is struck by only red, green and blue light (the light that passes through the color filters on the color wheel), thus only red green and blue light hits our screens using such a PJ, and only one color at a time. It is the "persistence of vision" of our eyes that makes us see the full visible light spectrum. As I'm sure you know, it is the same phenomenon that lets us watch a CRT television without seeing the even and odd scan fields, but rather one image that doesn't flicker.

If what T.I. says is true, I don't understand how iridescence can come into play with such a PJ.
You have MUCH more experience with this stuff than I do, and if you say iridescence is a problem I believe you.

The next time I have my PJ in my "lab" I'll do some testing and see if I can work this out so I finally "get it".