Quote:
Originally Posted by respect10 What are the main differences between silver fire and BW?
What are the ingredients and where can I get? What is the difference in the price of making silver fire or BW? What is more complicated and harder to do?
And the main question which is better? 
Harp,cust10...What do you think??  |
Respect I am new on this forum but not to the PJ community... if you need credentials just ask Harp, custy or mech
Okay... The difference besides price and being much more complex is that SF uses two totally different approaches.
First they use micas/iridescence to provide the 'gain' and irredecence is the last thing we want in our screens. Do a quick Google search of it then come back...
... back?

Irredescence causes refraction and a shimmering effect, think oil in a mud puddle, that rainbow effect is irredescence. That's what mica does and why it is used. It's nothing we are making up either, just a few simple searches and clicks and you can read all about it. For artists it is a cool effect. It's also used for custom car paints, but refraction is not what we want for a screen.
As much as certain people try to condem the work and research we put into Black Widow, Scorpion, and Cream&Sugar, the research really is valid. We dropped mica's and irridescence in favor of non-interference methods and true D65 neutral screens. Actually we have been advocates of this way longer than even the commercial guys who are now tauting the Joe Kane Screen.
That doesn't mean the industry hasn't known about D65 neutral, it just wasn't a marketing buzz word until recently. Again... buzz word or not, we have been advocates of it for years.
Again, Mica refracts. Just look it up, it's the nature of mica and why it is used.
Companies like DIY Theatre use non-interference methods and have done a lot of research on micas and refraction and decided the negative side effects weren't worth the 'pop' as some call it. I also agree with them and Black Widow was born from a quest of looking for a way to improve image brightness with a non-interference method while also keeping the screen neutral and from hot spotting.
The second difference is SF is a mix that was made by eye while we actually did testing and sampling to ensure it is neutral. As good as a person thinks their eyes are, nobody can tell if something is neutral by eye. Simply put, everyone sees things differently, but spectrophotometers see things as they are. I know the 'theory' and claims that certain people are making is that their 'colorant component' is 'specially formulated' to produce a neutral screen that spectrally responds to RGB better than any other screen out there. Sounds great, but it simply isn't true. Ask for proof or a single test reading and you'll hear about the evils of data and testing... which should throw a huge red flare up right there. Instead you will hear about years of experience and 'empirical testing'. Thing is... we have that too!

And we can roll, spray, or even recommend a great commercial screen! It all depends on the person's skills, budget and requirements, not because we have a business and want to sell a screen and do the installation. Just think about that for a minute and it's pretty clear who has an agenda and who doesn't.
Here is the bottom line. If a spectro sees something as neutral it doesn't care how it was made, it is neutral. Period. There is no debate. Same as there is no debate that mica refracts. That is its nature. Some people say anything to support their method or opinion, especially if there is money involved. We actually prove it beyond any doubt... even though there are people that try to discredit things. Once again, we don't make a dime off this. Ask others that want you to PM them about buying a premade 'colorant' mix or full 'screen paint' if they can say the same!
Some think all of this is confusing, and it can be, which is exactly what certain people want it to be, but... just ask for the proof. If someone is making claims of the 'best'... then they should be prepared to back those claims up. I know we are.
We do not do anything that is not industry standards. We also are willing to show the test results. And, we are not professionals selling anything or making money from paid installations! If we can do that then I think everyone should ask the same from those that do this for a living. And if a professional resorts to name calling because we present both actual data as well as empirical data... well... I think we'll let you guys decide...