(22-02-2009, 08:38 PM)calypso Wrote: Did you manage to see a big difference from the M205 after the SIP. I often struggle (on light coloured cars) to notice much of a difference.
I must admit that any difference that the process may have brought was very slight - possibly slightly more clarity. The biggest plus in my books of the SIP followed by M205 process was the benefit of a 2nd pass over the area. With our test spots, we noticed that a single pass of either SIP or M205 provided quite a bit of correction but still left some of the deeper defects behind. We probably could have achieved the same results with two passes of either of the products, instead of one after the other.
(22-02-2009, 10:30 PM)springbok Wrote: Amazing swirls in those pics. You would never have said so in those earlier photos you posted.
(23-02-2009, 07:01 AM)calypso Wrote: Thats why the worlds best detailers are photographers
It may be a tongue in cheek comment Calypso, but it's so true. Taking photos in lower light conditions means that there is no harsh light to highlight the swirls. This is one of the reasons that cars done by the waterless carwash guys at malls look good in the undercover parking areas. The true state is only revealed once the owner drives into the natural light.
The posts that get my attention and respect are those where the detailer posts after photos of the car taken in direct sunlight and the true correction achieved is displayed.