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

[greenwaycourt]

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. 

[Tintguy1980]

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.

[doctor4766]

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 July 11 by doctor4766

[Tintguy1980]

> 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.

[OBXTodd]

I install the Palisade all the time. It's a great film I'm my opinion. PD40,45,50 are very popular. The 40 has the most exterior reflection but no as much as a duel reflective film. 

 

What are you wanting Exterior Film? I would avoid this.

[OBXTodd]

As for tintguy1980 and doctor, you have too much time on your hands, the guy asked a simple question and you made it all confusing.

[greenwaycourt]

Thanks Todd, this is helpful, I spent a few minutes online and haven't seen a single person elsewhere say they used the Palisade. At the end, were you saying that you would avoid installing exterior? 

 

I am getting grief from my HOA about reflectivity (the one I proposed before I did any research was literally titled "dual reflective" and had 15-17% exterior light reflectivity), and the palisade seems to be one of the higher quality, low reflectivity films available in my area. 

[OBXTodd]

Yes exterior film will not last long, especially in a tough environment. Of course this depends where you live.

 

PD 50 will have the least amount of exterior reflection at 9% and solar energy rejection of 48%.

 

You can find the Palisade specs on the Johnson Window Film website.

[OBXTodd]

Valid point Dano. Although this doesnt negate that the answers were all to confusing, even for someone who does it for a living. 

 

Glad you chimed in.👍

[Dano]

Anytime mr communications monitor. Happy to help 👍

 

For those reading, I had deleted a post thinking I had overestimated the slights to known industry professionals responding to the op. Looks like I was correct after all, unfortunately.