Got my posts deleted on another forum

[Felixbiel]

I not once bashed any of them and now they are bashing me. Awesome, shows real character on their part

[TintDude]

I just went and read the thread. WOW. I'd be embarrassed if that was my site.

You didn't bash anyone at all, they just piled on you.

[Felixbiel]

In fact if you read my post I actually made light of Tritek's good reputation. They are definately showing their a$$e$ over there. The thread speaks for itself.

[Fiveofeen]

My only advice would have been to not mention brand at all and just educate on how misleading IR performance values are and give a breakdown of the solar spectrum.

Science cuts the marketing bs pretty quickly.

[VIP tint + glass]

My only advice would have been to not mention brand at all and just educate on how misleading IR performance values are and give a breakdown of the solar spectrum.

Science cuts the marketing bs pretty quickly.

good advice

[VIP tint + glass]

I dont have a problem with him protecting his sponsor, just dont lie to me and try and say I am bashing people or attacking their character just be honest and say that he is protecting his sponor I wopuld of respected that.

Totally understand your position. It looks like you tried to handle it very respectfully.

ya got a link from the website?

Not that I dont trust ya..

Right here we should have something up on our site sometime next week. I don't like posting about stuff until it is on the shelf.

dang still not available? let me know when it is, u know where im at. wait we moved but still in the same building

[vquestfilms.com]

I dont have a problem with him protecting his sponsor, just dont lie to me and try and say I am bashing people or attacking their character just be honest and say that he is protecting his sponor I wopuld of respected that.

Totally understand your position. It looks like you tried to handle it very respectfully.

ya got a link from the website?

Not that I dont trust ya..

Right here we should have something up on our site sometime next week. I don't like posting about stuff until it is on the shelf.

dang still not available? let me know when it is, u know where im at. wait we moved but still in the same building

C-15 is available and I can get a few rolls of C-05 got another run going, turn in your paperwork and let's role!

I should have our website adjusted this week.

[EWF]

I am not a big fan of IR reporting

Hi VQ,

I stand with you on that and so does the IWFA. An excerpt from an IWFA memo on this subject follows:

In countries without established testing and reporting procedures for thermal properties of fenestration, several manufactures list an infrared (IR) rejection percentage to describe the solar heat control of their products. In the U.S. market, however, where the solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) exists as a far more comprehensive and well-defined denominator of solar control, the use of IR rejection values is not necessary and can be misleading for consumers. While infrared rejection is an important property of fenestration products it is not the only factor of solar heat control. Moreover, the effect of infrared rejection depends on which wavelengths are rejected, and there is no set standard determining which wavelengths are meant by an IR rejection percentage. Accordingly, IR rejection ratings do not offer a complete picture of solar heat control. Therefore it is misleading to consumers if manufacturers refer to IR rejection instead of the SHGC.

The SHGC predicts the heat gain of the total contribution of all three spectral regions of solar light- UV, visible light and near-infrared radiation (see the figure for relative contribution to solar energy by the three spectral regions). Thus, the SHGC provides the only valid evaluation of total solar heat gain of a fenestration product. The National Fenestration Rating Council sets the methodology for determining the SHGC of different products and includes this information on all of their fenestration labels.

-Howard

[EWF]

The rule of thumb has always been this; If you report IR, then it is assumed you are measuring the whole NIR spectrum (780-2500nm) unless you otherwise specify.

Hi VQ,

I am of the impression that you are well connected within that organization, so please double check me on this:

I do not think they are referring to the entire spectrum from 780-2500. Here is the reason:

There are multiple large gaps within that full range (780-2500) where no IR radiation at all reaches the earth. One gap is approximately 1300-1400nm and another even larger one is near 1800-1950nm. These gaps correspond to H20 absorption bands (where atmospheric moisture filters those particular wavelengths).

If in fact they are measuring the entire spectrum, then they are reporting that they block radiation that is not even present at the earths surface. It does not seem likely. Not impossible, but not likely.

Perhaps you can find out and let me know.

-Howard

[vquestfilms.com]

I am not a big fan of IR reporting

Hi VQ,

I stand with you on that and so does the IWFA. An excerpt from an IWFA memo on this subject follows:

In countries without established testing and reporting procedures for thermal properties of fenestration, several manufactures list an infrared (IR) rejection percentage to describe the solar heat control of their products. In the U.S. market, however, where the solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) exists as a far more comprehensive and well-defined denominator of solar control, the use of IR rejection values is not necessary and can be misleading for consumers. While infrared rejection is an important property of fenestration products it is not the only factor of solar heat control. Moreover, the effect of infrared rejection depends on which wavelengths are rejected, and there is no set standard determining which wavelengths are meant by an IR rejection percentage. Accordingly, IR rejection ratings do not offer a complete picture of solar heat control. Therefore it is misleading to consumers if manufacturers refer to IR rejection instead of the SHGC.

The SHGC predicts the heat gain of the total contribution of all three spectral regions of solar light- UV, visible light and near-infrared radiation (see the figure for relative contribution to solar energy by the three spectral regions). Thus, the SHGC provides the only valid evaluation of total solar heat gain of a fenestration product. The National Fenestration Rating Council sets the methodology for determining the SHGC of different products and includes this information on all of their fenestration labels.

-Howard

Howard,

I agree, SHGC is the way to go on flat glass.

When you are marketing automotive with a global brand however, then things get a little more complex. As in the case of C-05 and C-15, these are primarily automotive films so your glass being single pane lends to using .SC instead of SHGC. Then you have automotive consumers who are familiar with neither of those two terms so then the closest thing they can relate too is TSER so we use that. Now add the Asia factor where IR is king in marketing... this bleeds over to the US automotive market and thus it becomes relevant even though it is a "regional measurement." Just look at CPF's change in IR marketing for automotive, why did they do it? My guess would be to maintain some global continuity, at the very least the market reacts to it fact or fiction.

Case in point would be this other forum. There is a good auto dealer in Dallas that doesn't know diddly about how the Solar Spectrum, heat energy, and IR all relate. He just runs blindly with the marketing and looks glorious in the eyes of his associates on the forum but looks like a fool in the eyes of industry professionals. So he is either oblivious to facts or doesn't care, film will sell either way... we have to choose our path.

Like I said, I'm not crazy about it but it is not going anywhere so all I can personally do is keep it honest, in context, and educate people so they know what they are looking at and how it relates. I can live with whole spectrum IR measurements as long as I can explain what they really are. I cannot market glorified partial spectral IR measurements, I just don't feel right about that when I know better. That is my choice.