Jump to content

Johnson Window Films - Palisade. Anyone have experience with this film?


Recommended Posts

Is anyone familiar with Johnson Window Films? We are looking to install window tint on residential windows and are looking for a film that reflects as little as possible (while of course rejecting as much heat as possible). Their PD 75 EXT line has visible light reflectance of 8% and IR rejection of 56% and 79%. I just haven't seen any reviews online or anyone posting about it in this thread, so was just hoping to see some positive feedback, or any feedback really, before moving forward with it. Thanks all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selling film using IR is misleading and picking one by it's IR performance is short changing oneself.

 

Here's the technical facts, confusing as they can be, will lead to a more sensible decision when purchasing film products:

 

(N)IR is only one piece of the pie (48+/-%) and in many cases it is a select wavelength or a range of multiple wavelengths that they publish, but almost always never represents the 'entire' near infrared spectrum from, 780nm to 2500nm.

 

The best measurement for determining a film's final performance is to compare TSER's (total solar energy rejection), the higher, the better, or SHGC's (solar heat gain coefficient), the lower, the better.

 

After this, you must now determine how much light you want coming in.

 

Visible light accounts for 48+/-% of the total solar energy coming from the sun. Visible light converts to far-infrared same as near infrared (and UV), once absorbed into a surface and radiates off a surface as heat (that we sense). Far-infrared is heat, near infrared is not.

The sun's solar energy is comprised of visible light, near infrared light and ultraviolet light (just under 2% of solar energy). All three contribute to unwanted heat.

 

All I can add about Johnson Films is, they are one of a half dozen film makers in the marketplace today that date back to before 1980.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2024 at 1:39 AM, Tintguy1980 said:

Selling film using IR is misleading and picking one by it's IR performance is short changing oneself.

 

 

 I recently received a new Llumar automotive film swatch and was looking at the Ceranova ceramic films performance data.

 

The IR energy rejected for both the 20 and 35% versions is listed as 90%

The TSER is 59% and 49% respectively for these films.

 

Interestingly the IR energy rejection for the metalized Llumar films that I normally use isn't even listed in the performance data,I wonder if it's the same?, however the TSER for the Jetblack 20 and 35 films is higher at 62 and 58%! I know what I prefer.

 

I find it illogical to promote ceramic films as being superior, and therefore charging a lot more for them, when the IR is only a small part of the big picture.

 

Here is an excerpt from a page I have read recently (Why Infrared Rejection isn't a complete measurement of heat rejection. - Twilight Auto Tint)

 

Infrared heat only makes up about 53% of the total heat we receive from the sun. So with the other 47% of the sun’s heat left out of the picture, is there any point looking at the level of infrared rejection window films offer?

In theory, if you only wanted to know how much heat rejection was caused by a film’s infrared rejecting technology – and not from other factors such as its colour – then an infrared rejection measurement would be very useful. It would be particularly helpful if you are looking for a film that keeps your windows light, whilst blocking out a significant amount of heat.

However, there’s an important caveat to keep in mind when comparing different infrared rejection measurements: there isn’t really an industry standard to measure infrared rejection.

This means that the infrared rejection measurement you are reading may only demonstrate the infrared rejection achieved within a very small and favourable part of the infrared spectrum – rather than across the whole spectrum. It means that the level of infrared rejection claimed could refer only to the very small section of the solar spectrum that also happens to give the best result. So whilst technically true, such a measurement may have little value in the real world.

 

 

 

Edited by doctor4766
Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Infrared heat only makes up about 53% of the total heat we receive from the sun. So with the other 47% of the sun’s heat left out of the picture, <             Almost true, except for 'infrared heat'. To clarify from Twilight's post, the only infrared 'heat' found is in the far-infrared spectrum. Near-infrared is not heat, it is solar (light) energy or solar radiation.

Also, the above numbers add up to 100, so it does not account for UV. These are old school figures dating back to the genesis of the industry and have since been updated to the new, more precise numbers, sometime in the 2000-2010 period.

 

I don't have the exact (new) numbers by decimal point, so I report them as 48%+/- VL, 48%+/- NIR, and UV being less than 2%. I am unable to state which of the two is 48.xx or 47.xx, making UV being 1.xx.

 

Now for an example of using a selected wavelength to report NIR performance, we look no further than a 3M product publishing a number in the high 90's (I believe 97%). The reality of this number, is in the fact, taken from a single wavelength at 950nm.

 

The most intense NIR radiation is located between 780nm - roughly 1300nm. If you look at a graphic, you will see the line tracing radiation intensity runs up and down or high and low ... 950nm has one of the lowest dips on the charting between 780 and 1300; signifying one of the lowest intensities (see attached chart). This doesn't bode well as a marketing fact.

a solar enrgy chart.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  •   Sponsored by
    tintwiz

    tinttek

    filmvinyldesigns

    The Tint Tutor

    ride wrap

    signwarehouse

    Lexen

    martinmetalwork.com

    rewiredtech.io

  • Activity Stream

    1. 0

      facebook advertising for residential tint

    2. 0

      I would like to get feedback from the installer about the DUB film

    3. 0

      IWFA Membership

    4. 1

      Ineos fender

    5. 1

      Ineos fender

    6. 3

      Johnson Window Films - Palisade. Anyone have experience with this film?

    7. 0

      Model 3 rear glass

    8. 3

      Johnson Window Films - Palisade. Anyone have experience with this film?

    9. 3

      Johnson Window Films - Palisade. Anyone have experience with this film?

×
×
  • Create New...