nope, it's that simple. You're over analyzing things.

The window has a maximum opacity of 100%.

The tint you applied has a 20% opacity rating.

The officer measured your window's opacity to be 12%.

The difference in opacity between your tint and the measured opacity is 8%.

Therefore, your window did not start out at 100% opacity but rather 92% (100% - 8%).

 

re-reading your post, the 20% rating is surface-independent. the rating is for the film only and doesn't account for anything else.

 

i can see how that seems logical, but i'm not convinced. by that logic, 2 sheets of 50% tint on top of each other would = 0%. and that's obviously not correct.

 

it's not exact but since the factory tint is so close to 100% it can be used as a more accurate model than taking 12% of 20 (which I'm assuming is how you came up w/ 60%)

it's around 3-5% (or 97-95% rather). Which goes along with some tint shops offering 38% to get windows close to 35% which is what the majority of states limit side windows to

 

The tint is meant to be placed on glass, and obstruct a certain percentage of light.

It is that simple when applied as intended to glass. It may not be 100% exactly perfect, but it should be pretty close.

The ratings don't carry obviously when you do something like apply the tint to tint.

Bill's math is right.

 

Uh, no.

You allow 50% in. Then, you add another sheet of 50%. That second sheet allows half of the available light to pass to another sheet that allows half the available light to pass.

100% available light --> 50% tint(resulting light passed = 50%)

Now 100% of light available after the first piece is 50% of the original light source and is filtered through the second piece of 50%. The result? 25%... IF that was the way the items were to be applied.

As it stands, your junk is dark.

 

[quote name='s2krazy01' date='Jan 12 2009, 11:29 AM'] i can see how that seems logical, but i'm not convinced.

 

How many times can we say the same thing differnt?