Hmm Sharky I still don't get what you are saying...

"the absolute best setting for you is if you measure your eye distance and use that as front distance of the gun.that willl (theorically) let you have things touching your nose"

My eye distance is not that big, if I would use that the 3D effect won't be that huge, remember I am gaming on a 2 meters wide screen, that matters alot. I assume a Imax screen has enormous shifts, many times the eye seperation (not talking about parallel distance viewing ofcourse).

If you would use your eye distance, your eyes would cross exactly halfway between your eyes and the screen I guess. So hardly your nose.. the 3d effect would be minimal, well unless you are 10 cm from your screen :p

Btw, I can't focus on my nose, actually it is 2x further than that. There is quite some theory on stereovision (whether using intricate machines like us, or just your own eyes IRL) and it is not super easy.

ok maybe i expressed myself bad... i try it again... let me fix 3 points inside the game... point A: deep inside the game , point B: where lefteye image and righteye image cross each other.. the point where no separation at all exists. point C: the nearest point inside the game.. usually the back of the gun.

ok in point A you can have aLOT of separation.. its not a problem ebcause it is far away, and you get that point by crossing your eyes a littel bit...

point B has no separation

point C should have no more than Eye distance...

now what you say is correct, if you have a low convergence setting.. if you have a higher convergence setting you can have things outside even without having a high separation at point C.

bye

sharky

Sharky, what you are saying is exactly the wrong way around..

Point A, far into the game should be your eye distance! Your eyesmust look parallel into the distance and thus eye distance wide seperation for long distance viewing.

Point B is the crosspoint.

Point C is the closest, for this your eyes must cross quite alot indeed. But this crossing is for a close by point (as back of gun etc).


Yours is the wrong way around.. (now your last post makes sense).. sorry to say this (I highly applaud your DIY posts) but do you have your L and R the wrong way around?

at the moment i feel a bit confused.... at one side mine is totally logic for me and i saw it at the cinema, at the other side yours is totally logic too... but the two things cant live toghether..

by the way, whats up with your tutorial?! it was one of the best and now it is gone.... are you going to repost it in the future?

Don't be confused, look at it this way:

If point A, far in the game, would have a seperation bigger than your eye seperation, your eyes would have to rotate outward, this is completely non standard and for some would hurt quite soon. Also, this would not be similar to any real life situation (at least any I have been into )

On the other hand, if you make the seperation eye distance, then your eyes would look parralel into the far distance, as they would in real life.

Closeby though, your eyes have extremely shifted images. Hold your finger in front of your nose with your tft say 30 cm behind it. If you look with your right eye to your finger, and beyond it to the monitor, it would for instance be located on the left side of the monitor, now use your left eye. In this case your finger is in front of the right side of the monitor. This is what the seperation would need to be, to make something feel very closeby, huge seperation.


Concerning the tutorial, I have it saved and will repost it pretty soon... sorry bout that.

ok you convinced me.. but now i don't understand why at the 4d cinema the separation was very low in a popping out part.. boh.. nerver mind.. not important.. by the way, could you please explain why you removed it, maybe if it is a problem for you then not with to many details.. dunno have kind a feeling that it is related to our convergence discusison.

ehm i don'T want to go into your private life, so don't misunderstand this post.. my english isn't the best so its easy to misunderstand what i say.
but even if i don't have a projector setup, i really would like to have your topic on the forum because its one of the best in here...

bye

sharky

*bump* to notify that the guide is back up. Tril saved it, so I could repost.
(I lost the saved post..)

Thx Tril

Nice to have it back! One of the best!

cheers

yeahhhhhhh great! this is a good one! i post ist as sticky..

I want to do a project like this. But it seems like the driver support issues would force me to use old graphics cards. Is there really no option for contemporary cards (9800gx2) that will work with a passive stereo projection system? I would totally be willing to pay for drivers that would let me use my own rig.

I think Iz3D is going to release a new driver, which supports two output formats. They call it 'HMD' or dual output, this would be the driver you'd need. However it won't be for free and it's not released jet.

The pros are, you can use every video card and don't have to turn out eyecandy.

I did this once with a couple LCD projectors, one mirrored to flip its inherent polarization. I used a Da-Lite silver matte screen, they are surprisingly affordable, here is a 100" diagonal 4:3 for $63

http://www.provantage.com/da-lite-90618~7DALI094.htm

I don't remember where I got mine, but I think it cost under $150 for a bigger square screen, possibly 100" square.

If you search around you can find direct-from-factory sellers that offer the matte in these older free-standing mounts for a very good price. http://www.google.com/products?q=dalite ... t&start=20

You can leave them in the tripod, or drill out the rivet and use them on a wall.

I ordered a polarized screen at http://www.buydalitescreens.com
I got the Deluxe Model B, 43" x 57", Silver Matte.

My second projector broke down while the screen was getting shipped to me so I never tested it with polarized glasses. I did test a sample of the material before buying the whole screen. If you send an email to Da-Lite asking for a sample of a material, they'll send you one for free. Their silver vision and silver matte materials keep the polarization.

The second projector was out of warranty so I gave up on the dual projector stereo rig and I have a spare bulb for the working projector. I'm now using the remaining projector with the Da-Lite screen to play on the Xbox 360.

Before ordering the screens, I did some tests by projecting on the wall and on samples. I was never able to perfectly line up my two projectors pictures. I made a stand with adjustable tilt and I used it to try to line up the two projectors pictures. The problem was the keystone effect because the projectors were not projecting from the same height. It's probably best to do as Jahun and get projectors that have lens shift. You won't have the keystoning problem that way but the projectors might be more expensive as it's something usually found on the higher end models.

I wear eyeglasses, and they can distort your vision like out of adjustment keystone will, so I can handle a bit of misalignment between my eyes.

You for sure need real keystone (fresnel lens) adjustment, that is what I had on my projectors. That software keystone is very bad for picture quality.

Ouch, I bought a Versatol, they are quite a bit cheaper, especially in the square formats. I looked on ebay and the used Silver screens were pretty bad looking, and the material alone was pretty expensive, so I did as you and bought new .

Now I am looking at these rear projection DLP Mitsubishi screens with shutterglasses support, pretty nice for ~$2000 you can get a 57" model: http://www.google.com/products?q=WD-578 ... &scoring=p

I don't like flicker, but they claim it is 60hz per eye, it might do the trick.

The newer 60" model is even cheaper. $1,799 MSRP.
http://www.google.com/products?q=WD-607 ... &scoring=p

Oh man you are so right, that is pretty darn cheap for a 60" DLP, and you don't have to stash a projector anywhere, or worry about people blocking the light from it, or purchase a silver screen.

If only I could test one of these out to see if I am bothered by the refresh rate. I wonder what the bulb life and cost is in these?

Edit: Amazon.com looks cheaper by $70, they don't charge $250 for shipping, it is free. (I don't know about tax)
http://www.amazon.com/Mitsubishi-WD-607 ... B00166BNFS

Of course the question becomes what sort of shutterglasses solution you would need, and how they would connect.

So let me get this right.. with a passive pojection rig you have little to zero ghosting and the screen size is big enough that you literally feel right inside the games 3D environment? The z800 just lets you see a 3D window view, shutterglasses and the iz3d seem to have some ghosting issues. The iz3d seems to run really hot as well while turned on. The samsung 50 HDTV I got has stereo and a port for IR glasses, but I haven't had more luck then being able to see google maps in 3D.

So.. there is *NO* ghosting at all with a passive projection rig? If that's what they used at Universal Studios at the Shrek show then that 3D should be flying into your face or all around you since that little pixie zoomed into the center of the seating at the end, and giving the appearance it crashed into the exit sign at the left of the seating.

You can check the special "Ghosting" thread where i posted images of my polarized rig. The ghosting rejection seems to be somewhere in between 85-90% according to the ghosting scale on that first testpicture. See Here. It need to be a very high contrast before ghosting even is noticed but the crosstalklevel never gets disturbing.

Nowadays when i game i have totally darkness in the room because the screen itself becomes (more or less) invisible. It's just me and the gameworld in an almost natural size environment. Nothing really beats that!

cheers

Doeas anybody know where to get a hold of a harkness svreen on the net. Ive only comed across sellers who sell to other companys.

Hello Guys,

It's great that I stumbled upon this thread

I don't know if you have been following my other thread on here. But I am currently building a curved screen passive setup. I hope you could help me.

I have got in touch with a company that can build me the curved screen on a custom made metal framing. The total cost is £750 including delivery from Da-lite. I am based in the UK and that's an incredible price. The screen is 3 feet tall and about 4.5-5 feet wide. You sit in the middle and the screen curves right around you in an arch covering your full field of view. Your peripheral vision is covered all the way around on the horizontal. Now the idea is I am after doing a passive setup, so I am going to be using two projectors. For cost what would be the best projectors to use? DLP or LCD? I don't want any ghosting and I want objects to fly out of the screen and go into the screen creating amazing depth. I am on a budget, originally I wanted the whole setup including projectors to only cost me £1000. I now see that's not possible. I was looking at 1024x768 DLP beamers, As for such a screen I need a lot of vertical resolution. I seen I can get two 1024x768 beamers for about £920 total. But 1080p would be a much more combined vertical resolution but then far more costly unless I use a 1080p DLP beamer which I can get for £950 and just do active stereo. Then I heard that for a rear projection which is what I need to do for my setup as I cannot have any shadows on screen as I will be sitting about 1.2 - 1.5 meter from the screen, and also brightness from the rear is better on the eyes. Someone said you cannot do active stereo for this kind of setup as the screen isn't a silver screen and the company said it can't be a silver screen for this kind of setup. I don't know what he meant by that. But anyway as I have given you some idea of my sort of setup that I want to build I hope you could help me out. I need projectors that have been tried and tested for stereo 3d for the best performance while being not too expensive. I want this setup to be used with the new Nvidia drivers that are being worked on for their new shutter glasses, I heard these drivers will also being compatible with passive 3d setups using circular polarized glassed like they do now, but they will only be vista only. Is this true? I read in some recent interview with some guyf from Nvidia that they believe with these new drivers active stereo is better than passive stereo, they said that passive stereo is something that may never be very good or at least not for many more years. I hope you can help me guys

Many thanks in advance

I'm no expert but here's some things to check:
Do the projectors work well with curved screen or is there projectors which are tuneable for these kind of screens? (the image will be distorted and you'll also have focusproblems depending on how curved it is)
A passive projection rig ghosts but the phenomena is very light. Rigs with shutterglasses will also ghost independing on what monitorsolution you have because the shutters themselves are not perfectly ghostingfree either. Circular polarization is somewhat said to be better than linear but i disagree on that. I have tried both and circular ghosts a slight bit more and you're not able to turn your head around so much either before ghosting gets unbearable. When you have a stereosetup with shutters/polarized glasses or whatever you're still forced to have your head in a somewhat fixed horisontal position, otherwise the image will not be correct (the image is originally rendered from two views side-by-side, not up and down. ).
If you want to know how much a passive rig ghosts (i'm using silverfabric screen, linear filters and lcd-projectors) you can check the link here: http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.p ... c&start=20

Biggest advantages with passive setups is the extra light you get. A dlp/shutter solution (less ghosting yes) is not bad either but you'll of course loose quite an amount of light.

Are you sure they said passive is not good? Or has it something to do with unwillingness making driversolutions for other setups than their shutterglasses? Personally i've never seen anything better than this so far. Of course it can change in the future.

ps: I can get back with pictures showing how polarization is preserved from sides and angles but that has to be a later matter. I'm in a rush right now but i'll get back with these kind of info or others if you like.

cheers

Hi Likay,

Many thanks for your great response, lot's of useful information there.

These are some snippets from an interview where I read about the Nvidia guy talking of active being better than passive found here http://www.gamecyte.com/is-your-gaming- ... oscopic-3d

Here's a small cut and paste below

GameCyte: Are there any plans for a polarization solution instead, or is it definitely going to be active shutter all the way?

AF: Right now we truly believe that our solution – the active shutter glasses — provide the best quality for an end-user. The technology that exists for passive polarized is typically only given to you at half-resolution per eye. If you imagine you’re running a monitor at 1680×1050, each eye will only see 1680×525, effectively, because of how the polarization technique has to be done on the LCD in order to show the right eye and hide the left eye. Certainly over time that can be improved; right now, that’s what it is. If you’ve ever seen half-resolution per eye, you know what happens is that the quality of reading text, and the quality of the image, is not as good as you’d like. Some people just don’t think the quality is that good.

With active shutter glasses, the way we’re pursuing the solution right now with ViewSonic, we can enable full resolution per eye.

GameCyte: What do you think of your competitors? You’ve told me already that these glasses are like nothing else out there, and similarly the ViewSonic display. But can you tell me what you think of IZ3D, for example, and their solution?

AF: I can’t really speak much to IZ3D’s solution; the only thing I can say is I’m excited by IZ3D. If nothing else, they work with our GPUs. Not a bad thing. I like them; I like them for that reason. I think if you look at the solution they have versus ours, IZ3D has some pluses. Some people like passive solutions, they don’t like active solutions, so that’s one reason they might choose them. The downside of that is like I talked about earlier, you’re going to get less resolution, less quality for the game. I know that our solution supports NVIDIA SLI; I don’t think their solution supports SLI.

They can do nothing but help, right? Because right now, they’re talking about stereoscopic gaming; they’re using our GPUs.

So there they talk of it being their route and it seems a lot better than passive in their views

I found the software that I was talking about it's called S0L7 it's a warping tool that's blends images from each projector so the image lines up in 1 seamless image with no distortion and focus problems.

If you have read that interview you would find that the Nvidia guy answers some questions where he says that multiple people can use the shutter glasses and it's flick free for people from any angle, they say people are not limited, you could have 30 people in the room watching and getting the same 3d effect from any angle. Now that's amazing that means they have eliminated ghosting as that means this setup can allow head movements which doesn't ruin the 3d effect.

What I really want is to use my curved screen setup for a head tracking setup for flight sims. I want to use the Track IR 4 Pro with the shutter glasses or polarized glasses and turn my head to the left and right to see around the curved screen is this possible without ruin the 3d effect.

Hmm. when he's talking about passive he means the zalman monitor which does have half resolution. The zalman is also a passive solution.
For a passive rig with dual projectors you'll simply need two different outputs from the graphiccard. The resolution is full and brightness great.
The IZ3D is another example of a passive solution but inspite of the zalman it has full resolution with no interlace lines. It uses two lcd's, one backplane which left and right pictures is drawn on and one front polarizing lcd which handles polarization with help of a complicated algorithm. It ghosts more than the zalman but you have no annoying interlace lines instead.
He's right that shutters might be the best consumerway3d (cheap is consumerfriendly). A passive rig with two projectors, silverscreen and filters is not cheap. So now i get the picture.
However making stereodrivers for dual outputs is the most simple way for programmers to make 3d though. Left eye to one output and right eye to the other one. So if we get stereodrivers for dual vga depends only on the goodwill of nvidia.

Hi Smoothy!

I think there are some assumptions being made here - especially since the product hasn't even been released yet!

There is a very big different in how polarized solutions versus LCD shutter glasses solutions work. LCD shutter glasses are based on lenses that flash between transparent and black very rapidly between your eyes and in cooperation with the display (e.g. DLP HDTV, CRT, single projector, etc.) to alternate between left and right views. It is not angle dependent because the technology has nothing to do with where the viewer is sitting. While I'm sure the technology will be well received, NVIDIA has a vested interest in backing this because it will be compatible with all fast refresh rate monitors and displays. Little to no cooperation is required from the display manufacturers to make their glasses work, and selling glasses is where NVIDIA's money will be made (in addition to GPU sales).

The ghosting results will be dependent on a combination of the display quality and the ability of the glasses to block out the image from the opposing eye. There is nothing in the interview that spoke to this, and with every display having slightly different characteristics, I'd wait and see how the actual product performs before jumping the gun on expectations. I'm sure it will do well - I just like to see things first.

The polarized solutions are nearly 100% dependent on the display. When NVIDIA participates with this, it is as a software provider for Zalman and other companies as they come to market. NVIDIA can't sell their glasses for these solutions because polarized glasses are already dirt cheap and are not sophisticated enough. Polarized glasses, as demonstrated by Real D and IMAX 3D, are inherently meant for multi-person viewing, but the technology needed to display the content is a bit more complex.

You have a choice for your personal setup. You can have a single projector that is most likely DLP with LCD shutter glasses. NVIDIA would make sense here as theirs is the only LCD shutter glasses software solution right now. If you can do two projectors, then iZ3D is the way to go because NVIDIA doesn't have the output option you need. If you can get a circular polarized solution going with two projectors, that would give you similar head movement benefits as LCD shutter glasses, and the light loss will be minimal.

You will have to talk to our members about the software benefits between the two companies as that's not my place.

Regards,
Neil

Many thanks for the reply

Again excellent information I am getting from you guys as always.

One thing that I need to take into account, how much would such a setup cost me?

Is it okay to use two 1024x768 monitors? That would give a combined resolution of 2056 x 1536

another question, I have a sanyo PLV-Z2 LCD native 60hz 1280x720p projector. It can also do a resolution of 1280x1024 85hz, is it possible to get another one of these and do circular polarized passive projection or even just use the one to do active projection?

Many thanks in advance

Lcd's and active solutions haven't gone together well but this has changed lately! The only way to be sure is either ask someone with experience of active with the specific projector you have. If it handles 85 hz it means that it takes 85 hz as input. NOT that the screen itself necessarily refreshes 85 times a second! If you have shutters you can try, the only other way is to ask someone with experience of the specific projectors. Generarly i have the impression that dlp-projectors have higher compability with active shutter designs than lcd's.

What 3d-projectorsetup to choose depends on how much money you wants to spend.
For an active solution you need a compatible projector and shutterglasses. This is the cheapest and probably a more ghostingfree solution (depends on the hardware used though) than a passive setup. You'll loose quite some light so you need a dark room. A pair of shutters is needed for each viewing person. A maximum of light throughput is 23% to each eye because the shutterglasses only let through 45% light max when "open". Reason why shutters do this is simply that they're using polarization (45% loss) to shut on/off. Since the eyes has to share the total light the total result is only 23% each eye.

A passive solution is expensive because: You need two projectors, silverscreen and projectorsfilters. One simple pair of polarized glasses is needed for each viewing person.
According to my experience you can use simple polarized filters with the angles 45/135° with lcd'projectors (tried with mine) with good results. If the projectors have 45/135° native angles for the colors this don't work. Then you have to use 0/90° glasses and filters.
You'll loose some light (45% max light throughput each projector) but since you have two projectors you'll have double as much light as with shutterglasses.
If you use special stereopol filters (only works with lcd's) you'll get a very high light throughput: 75% and greater to EACH eye! I have them and gaming on 100" with 2000 lumen projectors in fully daylight is no problem.
If you ask me ghosting is no problem in a passive polarization rig and you can also check the picture in the link above.
Tip: If you're going to use ordinary polarizers from polarization.com or whatever: Keep them at a few cm's distance from the beamerlense since i fried a pair of cameralenses trying. I had them very close to the lense at this time though (5 mm's )
Be sure you have keystone correction on the projectors! Otherwise you'll have to live with a scewed 2d-vision with your screen. It still works ok in 3d though. It's also a slight bit tricky to align and trim the projectors right in a passive rig but that's a part of the sport.

Sidenote: I think you can try out how your projector works with a curved screen if you take some white bed sheets and hang them on a curved structure (metalbar or whatever you have in your possesion). Then you should be able to try how your projector optically behaves with such rig.

Cheers!

Many thanks for the replies

I will have to do that white sheet method to see the sort of curve I can get from my projector, could you tell me please can you use shutter glasses to do active stereo on two LCD projectors, or with two is it always only polarized 3d?

sorry for all the questions

If my LCD projector turns out to be able to see stereo 3d, then I was thinking of buying the Nvidia sutter glasses when they are released, do you know if they would work with their new drivers on on LCD projectors? From articles I have read there is no mention of projectors, only LCD and DLP monitors, they say you need true 120hz monitors, it sounds like it's not absolutely needed only if you just want the best effect, can you verify as well if it's okay with a projector that's capable only of 85hz?

One other thing, I just read of sanyo coming out soon with a true 120hz refresh rate LCD 1080p projector, it's going to cost $3350 that's pretty incredible as I could use them with Nvidia's new solution for active stereo, I may have to hold off from doing the full curved screen setup as it seems to be quite costly, so I could instead work on building up to it, start with one projector and a flat screen and then after as I got more money work towards getting 2 projectors the curved screen, the custom made metal projector framing etc

Lastly I just read on this forum that when you do two projector setups you don't double the refresh rate, it was my understanding that if you use a single projector that has true 120hz refresh rates then each eye sees 60hz if you use two 60hz LCD or DLP projectors you then get 120hz (which is the same as 60hz for each eye, simply one projector for each eye, each projector being 60hz or 85hz)

Sorry for all the questions but I do hope you can answer them

Many many thanks in advance

No problem. I'll answer those i can but now it's starting to be difficult. Not because of the questions, rather that i don't know the answers.

I'm not sure if get it right with using two projectors in an ACTIVE config. The only way i can think of it is using them in span-mode so you get a very wide screen which should be possible, even in 3d using shutterglasses. I have no practical experience in a setup like this though but i think i've seen such a setup in a thread somewhere. Of course both projectors need to handle active 3d for this to happen.

Regarding the new nvidiadrivers i don't think anybody else than nvidia know refreshratelimitations or anything else with their new drivers. It would be strange though if other refreshrates than 120 Hz can not be used but it's an open question so far.

I don't know any ways to see how a projector manage active 3d with shutterglasses without having shutterglasses themselves so i can't really give an answer here. But: These are lcd-projectors and they're most probably not able to handle active 3d.

And yes: It's true that two projectors does not increase the refreshrate in stereo. The shutterglasses works the way that they cut off one eye when the image for the other eye is shown and vice versa. This means that if you're using two projectors they still have to shift images at the refreshrate to work properly. This is also why i cannot see any other practical solution than spanmodes for multiple projectorsolutions with shutterglasses. Having two projectors beaming at the same area on the same screen will increase the light, not the refreshrate.

Many thanks again for your reply sorry that I was late to respond. I think I am going to have to sit down and do some extensive research and a lot of reading before I go spending any money. I will need to find just the right setup and see what I can do on a budget. But anyway thank you very much for all the replies you guys have all being very helpful.

Hello. Im in the prosess of putting up my 3d rig. Ive used this great guide as help. I use a harkness 3d screen. My problem is that it is much brighter in the center than in the edges. Is there a way around this? projectors further away, or sitting further away? the last one seems til help a bit.

edit; I used tips recived from Yahun, and now it works great

I also have that phenomena but strangely enough i only noticed it after i took a picture on it and looked at the picture.
I believe it depends highly on the screen used though. Myself i use a silverfabric screen and i don't feel a need to try anything else.

I have now put up my own 3d projection rig using your great guide. And the result exeeds all my expectations.
I bought a harkness hall spectral 3d silver screen. It only costed 158 euros, including boarders and eyelets!
roughly 2,1 * 1,2 meter. thats not twice the price of the silver fabric.
the price for the exact same size and features from silverfabric was 497 euros (also including straps).
Felt the need to correct the pricing information. I recommend harkness 3d screen. Both for price and for 3d quality.
Thanks for a great guide

Thanks! I sooner or later will replace mine since i have some wrinkles on it won't go away (mishap first time when too eager to set it up ). How is the harkness in characteristics? The silverscren is like a textilebase with a thick silvercolored plastic coating. It's elastic which is ok to use with my rollercurtain. You think a harkness will do as well?
I've mailing them now and see if i might get a sample from them.
Thanks for the tip btw. I'll let you know what it's gonna be.

I have no experience with other silver screens, but I think it is great. Nearly no ghosting. I even use it for linking (2 xbox 360 linked together, using only one screen, with modified glases that have the same polarization) There is some sparkling to be noticed, but only on even coloured areas as mentioned.
It looks like a reguler strechy material with some sort of spray paint on. I think it has to be streched to a frame to work the way it is ment. Then you get no wrinkles. The viewing angle and polarization ratio is also great btw. peak polarization is 140:1, and viewing angle is 24 degrees off center. (i think silverfabric is 80:1 and 17 degrees). Looking forward to hearing of your findings with the sample.

how much did the op spend on this passive setup?

Thanks for the info, not sure why it mismatches yours.. My original info in the first post is getting a bit old but that's a huge difference. Perhaps transport costs were high, or I just had a very pricey reseller But that 158 euros is very cheap, nice!

Perhaps by now there are so many sellers, and buyers, that prices are getting more sensible. In the end, it's not superspecial material and has existed for a while.

Hmm didn't I write that down up there?
I guess 2x 1.2k for the projectors was by far the priciest part. Guess some 500-1000 extra euros for screen, filters and a pretty good aluminium frame... So 3.5k tops?

Projectors are cheaper now and the screen can be stretched onto a board (is better too, I just needed easy mobility) and with a 158 euro screen price mentioned here I guess it can be done verywell for <<2k euro's now.

Hi to all I'm new but very interested....
I read the forum, reply and posts but I'm still confused probably because my english isn't perfect..
A question: I have an hitachi pjtx300 and soon another one (tx100 or tx 200 or tx300), can you explain me exactly what I must have/buy and where? and how to assemble all?
Sorry for my bad english and thanks to all!!
great site!!!!

Hi
has anyone tried Screen-Tech screens?
http://www.screen-tech.de/
they have front and back projection passive screens
The rear projection ones look interesting because they are rigid and can be ordered with frames
and not too expensive for the smaller sizes. I am thinking of converting a rear projection television
chassis to passive back projection

Peter m