The Ultimate 3D projection system: A Practical Discussion Thread - Page 64

the most afordable option is a desktop pc with an Nvidia quadro fx dual output video card. i just built one with a quad core cpu, blueray player and a 1gb memory quadro fx for leass than $600.

This is definitely an idea I like but I am totally new to the HTPC. I think this might be something I could explore. Any place anyone here could point me to to get started and for a newbie at the HTPC?

there is some good info in the HTPC treads here. i have built HTPC's from regualr desktop pc's but there are some far better chassis to use that fit the need better with port arrangements and such but they are basically a PC. the operating software is something im exploring as well to make them more home theater friendly. as far as the video card that can demultiplex there are slightly older ones like the nvidia quadro's ive used that are great and chaep on ebay.

There's a new demultiplexor, looks promising. http://www.mviewtech.com/listen.asp?ProdId=111027135250

MA2PB206 triple-channel active to passive 3D converter module is a standalone hardware device that does converting and blending at the same time. It’s based on Mviewtech’s exclusive hardware video processing technology and easily blend two groups of passive projectors. It receives high resolution original data (up to 330MHz) from PC via DVI or Displayport and split them to two channels (odd frames and even frames) for all the six projectors.

So how much is it?

+Has anyone tried this before?

Nevermind it's $12,000!!!!!

it looks like this box has the option of being 2,4 or 6 ports of DVI out to make 1, 2 or 3 dual stacks in a passive 3D setup. its not HDMI though nor dose it split off the audio channel.

lol well the 1300$ were asking for the geobox 501 dosnt seem so bad...

You can say that again.

$12,000, that's crazy! I figured it would be in the $1000 range.

I happened across an image of it on yahoo images, then clicked the link. When I saw that it had a DVI-D dual link input and stated that it worked with Nvidia 3D Vision, I posted the link here.

It only has one input, so it wouldn't work with 3D Surround Vision or Eyefinity. So it's not that special, to command that price, even if it had 3 inputs with genlock.

The 12 000$ price is for the triple channel with edge blending version.
The single channel version is only 3000$. (ahem... only....)
It claims to support either Dual-link DVI 120HZ signals or DisplayPort 1.1a (you have to choose when you order it). With such features it clearly targets the PC market. Even though they are not clearly named in the product page Dual Link DVI is Nvidia 3D Vision territory, DisplayPort 1.1a is ATI HD3D territory. (Display Port 1.1a is the minimum spec required to do 1080p120Hz frame sequential stereo)
Even though it's too expensive for my purse, I think it's a good news : It's the first time I actually see a product which clearly claims full resolution / full bandwidth support (not just the Hdmi minimal specs).

EDIT : the manual clearly mentions Nvidia 3D vision support on both the DVI and the DP version.
I'd say an ATI Radon card with Eyefinity would probably be a better quality/price option than a Quadro card. Unless you buy an old or second hand card. Quadros with frame-lock tend to be significantly more expensive than their consumer equivalents.
Edited by BlackShark - 11/18/12 at 4:38am

i agree, quadro cards can be quite expensive, ive found a lof of them used on ebay real cheap, thats the only reason i would say that. i have not played with ati cards in a while and not for this kind of system. i would defer to your expertice on this

I thought genlock on nvidia was only achieved once a seperate smaller add-on card is used in conjuction with the quadro card and that only a few models supported it.

It's too bad the Matrox MC-100 Dual SDI to HDMI Mini Converter for 3G/3D/HD/SD with Multiplexer has SDI connections, it would be a great solution to get genlock.
http://www.markertek.com/Video-Equipment/Video-Processors/HDMI-Converters/Matrox/MC-100.xhtml?MTX-MC-100

I'm suprised Matrox doesn't have a similar HDMI or Display Port product.

I also believe their genlock technology is patented, so maybe you could contact them and describe the market for such a product.

Genlock is for synchronizing separate external elements. All we need is internal synchronisation between outputs on the same card. It's called Frame-lock in both Nvidia and ATI driver manuals, and it's a professional card exclusive feature in both cases.... except when you can trick the driver with Eyefinity (which Nvidia does not allow).

So using Nvidia's Nview, the same result can not be obtained with a GTX/Consumer GPU? I know that Nvidia removed Nview from their GTX drivers quite awhile ago and were only including it with Quadro drivers.

I'm not sure but I think read that nvidia is including Nview again in their latest GTX 300 drivers. If not, Nview can still be activated with a GTX card, there are workarounds posted on the web.

Edit : Here's a link to Nview http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_8400.html
Edited by Rugrash - 11/19/12 at 5:31pm

I am not a real fan of dlp as I see rainbows easily.

What projectors would be good for your product?

Would the qumi q5 leds be fine?
How about 2 jvc rs1?(lcos)

Or would lcd be fine?

I'm not sure nview works or not. Spanning the desktop isn't enough to keep the sync properly. You need to make sure the displays are also refreshed exactly at the same time (otherwise there is no advantage over the traditional dualview mode, it actually is worse since non 3D applications and windows keep flying between the eyes when you're in side by side spanned mode)
The Eyefinity trick ensures that the displays are refreshed at the same time, which i'm not sure nview's spanned desktop mode does. (I don't have an Nvidia card to try)

have you looked at new DLP units? they have improved the RBE a lot. as far as LCD there are several users here that have liked out LCD optomized filter set on some LCD projectors, and some who did not like the colors on their LCD systems with out filters. the LCoS is not the best as there is large parts of the color bands near yellow and cyan removed. LED projectors suffer the same issue. it will work but the colors between eyes are not as good. of you look back in the thread and at the official omega 3D thread you will see some color patter tests and discussion on differnt projectors both DLP and LCD that people liked.

well i just got the optoma HD33 as the RBE was MEANT TO BE FIXED.. utter garbage.. its as bad as ever.. DLP is awful...always has been, always will be...never again

If you go the LCD route, I'm part of those disappointed by the colour fidelity of the omega system. With the adapted filters the colours are watchable but not good enough. The sharp colour spectrum of LCD projectors struggles to produce balanced colours. I keep switching between polarised and Omega systems depending on the application I want to run.

The Omega system is crosstalk free, which is a huge thing, but I find myself using my polarised system more and more due to the better colour and higher brightness since my polarising filters are Advisol SPAR filters, expensive but designed specifically to leverage the pre-polarised light from LCD projectors with primary colours polarised at different angles. The brightness difference is significant.
I however switch back to the Omega system in a few games which cause too much crosstalk, but I have to keep the high gain silverscreen to get enough brightness.
Edited by BlackShark - 11/22/12 at 2:42am

How does this compare to the omega for passive 3d. It is more expensive but you only need 1 projector.

http://www.volfoni.com/en/products/passive/polarizer/smartcrystal-pro


I sort of got a polarizer already it is a barco z screen I assume it is pretty much the same as above except larger.

http://www.barco.com/projection_systems/downloads/Barco_stereoscopic_proj.pdf]


any thoughts?

As I could buy just 1 good projcetor instead of 2 not so good.
And with just 1 projector I wouldnt need the geobox 501 either. The downside is I would need a silver screen.

these are just different polarizing systems. the barco article is very good and explains the differnt methods in a simple manner. the efficiency numbers are a little odd but the right idea. i spent a couple of years perfecting what we now call omega 3d at panavision and we tested dci calibrated cinema systems of all the other types. in that world our system was far better than the rest in all aspects. with uhp lamp projectors there is a color differance that is minimal on most dlp units and moderate to less that desireable on some lcd, despite some not liking the color at all with the omega filters on certain lcd and lcos units there are many satified users of these filters paired with lcs projectors. ive sold a lot of kits to diy home theater owners and some small cinemas using uhp systems and 95% of the feedback is very positive with very happy end users..

What is your current set up? How significant is the ghosting with polarized glasses (linear and circular)?

I only have linear polarised. I haven't tried circular myself but all the people who did, reported significantly more ghosting than linear for very little benefits and switched back to linear.
Circular is used by RealD because they have special copies of movies with ghost busting pre processing, which I don't have.

I have two Epsons EH TW3500 (euro version of the Epson 8100), the primary colours are cross polarised, some are polarised vertically, some horizontally. Silverscreen is 106" diagonal 16:9 Harkness Spectral 240.
At first i used traditional polarising filters at 45/135° to get balanced colours. Colour uniformity wasn't perfect, in one eye : greens were prominent on the left and the other combined primary colours (purple) are dominant on the right. In the other eye the dominant colours exchange sides. The brightness is slightly more than the Omega filters but not by much.
Then I got specialised polarising filters Advisol SPAR designed to leverage this special polarisation and put all the primary colours at the same angle while keeping a maximum amount of light. It makes the picture very bright, almost as bright as in 2D mode (the label says 80% transmission, but due to the non linearity of perceived light, I feel it's like 90% transmission). Colour uniformity is better but not perfect, this time the greens are dominating at the center and purple at the edges, the dominating colours are in the same locations in both eyes and in lesser amount.

In both cases, crosstalk is about the same. The majority of which is due to the screen (silverscreens are the weakest link at keeping polarisation) It's definitely there but in small amount, and because it's proportional to light intensity, in actual usage, you'll only see it when you have super strong contrasts in a scene of super bright areas right next to dark areas. As soon as the scene is properly lit, the ghosting fades into the picture and you don't see it at all. 3D Movie directors know about crosstalk problems at cinemas (RealD) and do a lot of work to avoid to do scenes that might cause crosstalk problems, and whenever they have sharp contrasts, it's usually located in a place near the focal plane with very little separation so seeing crosstalk in movies is quite a rare occurrence. Games are a different beast and tend to have crosstalk issues, some games more than others. First person games tend to be the worse offenders.

I tried the Omega system this spring. At first there was only one version (the DLP set).
On my LCD projectors there was a strong colour hue difference between the eyes, and across the entire picture, and many primary and secondary colours were very difficult on the eyes : not only were the colour hues different but their intensity as well. Using the projectors colour settings, I struggled to equalise the colour intensity and brought some of the the colours slightly closer to each other. I couldn't go as far as a wanted to because I reached the maximum amount of colour tweaking the projector allows, many hue controls had very little effect since the filters affect colour frequencies, the colour settings cannot compensate RGB with colours that don't exist anymore. In one eye, Reds are dark orange, Greens are yellow-ish and Cyan is light grey.
Following some testing Omega produced the special LCD version which I still have and sometimes use. The colours couldn't be really fixed, but the light intensity is almost balanced between the eyes with the default colour settings, the picture doesn't hurt the eyes but the hues are still off. I could tweak more easily and bring the colours closer but the final result still has a lot of difference between the eyes. The picture is watchable but whenever colourful content shows up I can't help but notice the colours are wrong.
Regarding colour uniformity across the picture, it's acceptable but not perfect, my throw ratio is a little bit low (1.5:1), but that works both for the Omega system and the polarised system.
The one strong point of Omega is crosstalk. While watching the picture, there is none. You can force some crosstalk if you look through the glasses sideways by turning your head away from the screen and looking in the corner of the lenses, but you don't do that i normal watching.
An other difference is how the filters work. Polarising filters are absorption filters, Omega filters are reflective filters. This means that you'll see the reflection of your eyes in the glasses if there's any amount of ambient light, you have to use the Omega glasses in complete darkness, and artificial lights have spiky spectrums so they'll produce different colours in each eye (CFL and LEDs) Incandescents should be better but I no longer have them in my living room, and they produce too much reflections anyways. In comparisons, polarised glasses deal with ambient light very well, and i can use my little directional lights to create a nice controlled ambient lighting without destroying the 3D expecience if needed..
Edited by BlackShark - 11/25/12 at 2:46pm

I think mostly no one cares if this is my first post or not so i'll just jump right in...

1. Poor "rdjam" this thread really got away from his original intentions.
2. motorman45 i'm personally a big fan of the "small arms dealer" that actually manufactures "weapons of mass destruction" but some perspective is still missing.

Since this thread is now more "Omega DD3D" than "rdjam ultimate 3d projection system" I'll try to share my newbie thought process and hope to somehow encompass both the originator's concept as well as the DD3D concept in my post.

So there's more bad news... not only am i new to avs but i also don't really know anything about projection technology nor do I personally own a projector setup.
Why the hell am i wasting your time to read this you ask? The answer is quite simple; I, just like rdjam and 99% of all veteran and newbie enthusiast, would like to have the perfect 3D home theater experience.
That said I think that despite the mountain of progress that this thread represents, there are critical missing links to the process of achieving the objective.

I will try to justify my thought process by first painting a mental image that some can relate to and even more of you can simply appreciate.

It is 2012, and now probably every new tv set purchase is going to range from 37" to 50" some even bigger and at least half of these new sets will be capable of providing full 1080p HD content to its viewers. As a result of recent price reductions in all types other than newer LED types, my home has a 46 inch in the master bedroom and the living room as well as a 42 inch in one of the other bedrooms for a grand total of 3 other full 1080p HD content capable hdtv sets in the home outside of the tv room.
On top of that the 46 inch in the living room is capable of active shutter 3d and the one in the master bedroom (really 47inches for the anal retentive) is actually passive 3d which honestly looks even better.
So now we come to the movie room which was originally intended to be a full home cinema but because of the expense had to function as a basic tv room until I could afford to go with the perfect setup.
Now the time seems right to take the next step and really turn that space into all it was originally intended to be. AND HERE WE ARE!

Now if you can appreciate that last paragraph for all I intended it to convey, some things should become immediately apparent to you but just in case this isn't so i'll spell it out for everyone.
i'll type this one in caps: THERE IS NO WAY I'LL WASTE MONEY IN THAT HOME THEATER SPACE ON ANYTHING THAT PROVIDES EQUALLY OR LESS THAN WHAT ANOTHER ROOM IN THE HOUSE ALREADY HAS TO OFFER. get it? That would be downright silly and even if i was rich i don't think that thought process would change at all.

So with that out of the way here's what I need to get off my mind....

1. CINEMASCOPE! So far i've seen very little focus on cinemascope 2.35 projection but for the ULTIMATE experience the ULTIMATE system CAN'T provide a 16:9 (1.77) image that is attainable on a cheap HDTV set. Also for those who attempt to solve this problem on units like the panasonics with lens zoom memory keep in mind that the ULTIMATE system should be full resolution and some of it is lost with the zoom feature so honestly without anamorphic lens 3D projection I'm just not sold at all. ULTIMATE people keep that word in mind.

2. REFERENCE! There is no point to all this discussion if we can't reference what the gold standard is. What i mean is who of you have taken light meters to a real D theater and an IMAX theater and quantified by actually measuring what the standard is for commercial projection? Without doing this we will never know if we're aiming too high or falling way short of what is a respectable standard of image projection in all aspects. If I had the equipment I would go equipped to measure screen heights and widths in a couple of these theaters then I would measure luminous outputs of the projectors used for 3D in these cinemas I would also measure light loss after whatever filters they use and if none of those measurements are allowed by management I would at least measure the all important value of lumens reaching to the eye after it passes through the 3D glasses. Armed with that information anyone can easily scale it to their home requirements to start off with a rough average that is close enough to a respectable standard.

3. 2D INTEGRATION! It happens without anyone ever really noticing it but in most instances the objective of ultimate 3D usually neglects the thought process of reverting back to the best situation for viewing HD two dimensional content which usually results in many people developing a less than practical user experience in the real world. Right now if your HDTV is 3d capable and you have a 3D bluray player then it's very straightforward to switch from viewing 3D back to 2D content. In developing the ultimate projector system for 3D viewing unless you are uber rich and plan to have a dedicated 2D home cinema separate from where you view 3D content then 2D content viewing should not suffer as a result of your new 3D capable projection equipment.

4. COST! The passive 3d approach is favorable to me but unlike everyone else I only dislike active shutter technology because it is impractical for me to be concerned about powered glasses that require battery changes or require me to remember charging them. Just like i'm not happy when i'm busy on the laptop and the low battery indicator comes on I'm quite sure i'd quickly toss active glasses in the bin for the same reason. I will never warm up to active shutter technology for this and their history of sync problems compounds my dislike for the technology. Flicker and darkness aren't even the concerns I have but rather more so inconvenience and of course the cost! The funny thing is you can have an epson 5020 projector system that provides quite an impressive 3D experience for only about $2600 inclusive of a pair of glasses. To justify spending more than that on a dual projector setup that means that the end result of the dual projector setup, regardless of how painful the implementation process is, has to clearly outperform the likes of the epson 5020 experience in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY. Poor color performance or sharpness issues and above all reduced blacklevel performance is just not going to cut it at this stage. Also I should highlight that from what i understand active shutter projection does not require silver screens for polarization retention so 2D content factors in well since silver screens are not a requirement and therefore the known negative artifacts of silver screens are not going to be an issue. I think silver screens are different from high contrast grey screens but I don't know about high contrast high gain grey screens.(hopefully someone who actually knows can help me confirm this) So again perfect picture quality is the ONLY real way to justify additional spending on 3D projection setups that use passive glasses instead of active shutter ones.

5. OMEGA DD3D! Considering the aforementioned issues even though I would not be willing to make any final assumption or conclude anything about motorman45's DD3D system I have tremendous respect for the system's actual potential for providing a higher picture quality solution that can justify an additional cost incurred for dual projectors instead of standard single projector active shutter systems.
I also believe that since polarization is not used, there is better competition between this system and the cheaper active shutter projection systems with regard to switching between perfect 2D viewing and perfect 3D content viewing since there is no need for a silver screen which should also eliminate the potential for hot spotting etc in 2D and 3D content. What I would have liked to say next is that it is totally unacceptable to have the color imbalance problem and that it is completely pointless if the polarized system beats the omega in a brighter display as rdjam experienced. But because no one took the time to create proper reference as I mentioned earlier, I cannot determine if the omega filters are being paired with the best projectors for the best results.
I blame motorman directly for this although not too harshly since part of his objective was to beta test instead of outright releasing the solution as completed and perfected.

If I were in motorman's shoes this would be my thought process... the only competition to the omega seems to be kits such as the volfoni which volfoni only recommends for use with DLP projectors and still (damit there's that pesky laptop low battery alert lol see? active shutter can't be far from this level of annoying) use polarization technology and therefore inherits the 2D to 3D screen related integration issues as well as the potentially higher crosstalk problems that the technology exhibits. Factoring that the volfoni is designed for single projector use and the cost of their kit is about $1500, then consumers who pay around $3000 for a decent dlp projector can have the "passive glasses" 3d experience with a few flaws for about $4500...but CRITICALLY this is still not the ULTIMATE experience.

Therefore someone should be willing to pay about $2300 plus double the cost for, not one but 2 projectors if they seek the ultimate 3D experience. Since this route would potentially have no downsides at all then this would qualify as ULTIMATE and therefore justify spending more than active shutter projection but still be much cheaper than off the shelf passive solutions such as the LG single lens dual projector solution.
If motorman thought this way from the beginning then all of his kits should have ONLY been the 12 glasses $2300 kits with the 501 geobox which should have fixed all of the color correction issues that users experienced along with the many other benefits of the geobox which would land it much closer to being the ULTIMATE solution (even cost-wise).

Last of all if I was in his shoes I would have already done reference calculations to know what level of brightness the cinemas provide and set about targeting consumer projectors for testing in an attempt to approach or if necessary even exceed the level of lumens reaching the eye from the commercial 3d cinema screens(realD/IMAX). I am sure a few phone calls around the area would have revealed at least one electronics store that would be willing to unbox a few projectors for a few moments or at least let him test the ones on display to get a rough average of how the home/consumer would fare when using the omega DD3D solution. That way just like volfoni he could BLACKLIST certain projectors that were not suitable and on the flip-side to that HIGHLY RECOMMEND certain other specific projectors taking the guesswork out of the equation which would mean that the consumer could simply pony up the cash purchase the required hardware and after doing the necessary calibrations be able to enjoy the ULTIMATE 3D experience quite happy with the money invested in achieving such a goal! (while still being able to boast of only paying half of what the cheapest passive systems cost for the projector alone. say roughly $8000)

Hi ttview and welcome to the thread.

You have some very good points about the quality/price problem. But this problem is universal, with any goods, past a certain point the price is no longer worth the little quality increase. And even though I'm a strong dual-projector advocate, I think dual-projectors are beyond the point where quality/price ratios are long forgotten.
When I look at your post I see a mismatch between the price tags you suggest and your ultimate requirements list.
I believe your ultimate projector system should be achievable but not at a reasonable price. In order to achieve your requirements :
-no compromise on 2D integration (picture quality) = no silverscreen
-no silverscreen + no shutters = Colour narrow band filters (Dual-projector Omega system) + Absolute dark room (no ambient light allowed or you'll see the reflection of your eyes in the glasses)
-no colour compromise + compatible with scope = Xenon lamp DLP projector + filters must be placed before the lens (inside the projector)
-no brightness compromise = Very powerful projector required
-no compromise on 2D integration (ie ease of use after installed) = mandatory hdmi demultiplexer and everything must be automatically controlled (rs 232 ?)

I'm not into most of these things (Xenon lamp, opening up the projector to modify it, anamorphic lenses, RS232) but I kind of have the intuition that these elements reach far above your price limit. I reckon you'd find yourself more in the >20.000$ category rather than here.
So if you still want to stay within your budget (and ours too) something has to give.

I'll be frank : most of use are here because we don't like active shutter technology and want passive projection (for a variety of reasons). According to what you wrote, I understand your most important issue with active shutter glasses is battery charge. If you can accept shutter glasses, then almost all of your picture requirements would be filled by that Epson projector you mention or a close rival (I'd tend to be suspicious about the crosstalk levels of LCD projectors, DLPs would probably be a safer bet on that point, It will probably take one or two more years before I can safely trust LCD displays to get rid of the crosstalk issue). I don't know the specifics of that Epson projector but it appears you like this projector very much.

Regarding your "reference" remarks.
I am not sure about what you mean by "the gold standard". Even if you have an unlimited amount of money, there are still personal preferences that will influence what the ideal system is for you.
You want scope ? I couldn't care less : most BluRay 3D movies are released in 16:9 format, if the movie is in scope, the movies are all letterboxed. I do not know any movie that is currently available in anamorphic 1080p, and my most important content (games) are designed for 16:9, so I don't understand the need for an anamorphic lens for 3D. Maybe you have a lot of anamorphic 2D content you still want to use in native anamorphic, but that's not my case.
You want to match the reference lumen output of cinemas, I exceed them by far (so much that a single viewing at my local theatre will remove any doubts about it) and I'm very happy about it, because my room walls are white and I often have a small lamp illuminating my keyboard when I play games : I definitely appreciate the extra brightness to compensate for the ambient light in the room. It would be different in a totally black cave, but how do you enjoy your movies in your home ? Do you want to have a living room or do you want to replicate a theatre ?
About colour calibration, I do not have instruments to do it, sorry I'm not an colour accuracy freak. I know I can't get the perfect picture with my budget, (ahem.... silverscreen... it does hotspot a lot, compared to the white wall behind it) so I don't need one.
Calibrating colours for the Omega system might be a tougher challenge than for polarised and shutter systems since it completely changes the colour spectrum and relies on optical illusions to maintain colour accuracy. Traditional colour meters might not work, you might need a high quality scientific spectrometer (4000$) to measure the actual Omega colour accuracy, I don't know many people that would spend that much for an instrument, especially at that price point. Most projector review sites don't use one and wouldn't be able to give you colour fidelity reports for the omega system.
Edited by BlackShark - 12/1/12 at 8:58am

Very good post. i would first say it was not my intention to hijack rdjam's thread . the omega 3d and panavision 3d was being talked about before i joined. i started an omega 3d thread for people to talk about it there but still questions come here. all of the developments that went into the omega 3d kit are what we had After the system was developed with and sold as Panavision 3D for digital cinema. . I spent countless hours over two years testing this 3D system in theaters including a custom test theater in LA making measurements of foot lamberts, extiction and chomatic performance using the best instruments including one i had to build myself to measure this kind of 3d system. we also had tests on all other cinema 3d systems to compare and refine our own.
realD is far from a benchmark and most all 3D in cinema is not true passive in that there is a wheel inside the projector switching between eyes. there are some dual projector cinema systems but they are rare.
as far as measureing light, cinema uses foot lamberts and home theater users tend to use lumens, there is a lot of talk in this thread about % efficiency and i spent a large amount of time on this topic more marketing and getting approval from the studios.
the Geobox came along after we had decided to offer kits to DIY AV folks and seemed like a good option to offer.
my last 1080p native dual stack projection system cost me less than 2k to build not including the geobox.

Thanks for the enlightenment guys...

BlackShark: Basically i'm getting the impression that you are ok with certain compromises especially the cost effective ones and i'm fine with that. I was really trying to stay focused on the original intent of this thread which expresses a desire to achieve the ultimate experience at home. By the word ultimate I assume rdjam meant little or no compromise as far as image quality etc is concerned. Therefore I formed all of my opinions around the objective of achieving perfection. The epson projector i mentioned is no big deal to me I just read that it performed pretty well in a review so i made reference to it.
So I quoted about $8000 in my ignorance but with your experience you expected everything I was referencing to come up to about $20 000 and that's perfectly ok because if you are absolutely right about that then at least we now know that perfection can be had for that price. I'm quite sure that $20 000 for the complete setup is still very reasonable compared to the prices i've seen for projectors that still used polarization to provide passive 3d content. If a $75 000 projector can be outperformed by a setup that costs $20 000 i'm quite pleased with that and even if I had to take a loan to purchase the equipment at least i know that after the $20 000 spent there won't be someone with a $50 000 system who will view content on my setup and conclude that it is of inferior quality. So basically even though I grossly undershot the price at least NOW we know that perfection costs about 20 grand. This is the direction I think rdjam intended the whole thread to go so that after we worked out what was required for the ultimate system even if we couldn't afford it at least we would have a target set and compromises from there could still yield acceptable results.

Motorman45: I know it appears that I came down harsh on your product and maybe even you personally but trust me I meant nothing personal and I couldn't find any other way to express what i said and still be as objective as I wanted to be. I would also like to say that I don't think you hijacked the thread at all I actually think that if most users who purchased the DD3D system were able to achieve results with a brighter image reaching back to the eye and also if the color problems did not exist (meaning after geobox calibration color could be perfected) then there would be no need to talk about anything but your system in this thread since that would in fact make it the ultimate 3D experience in the face of everything else that exists no matter how costly. The fact that your system could be afforded at consumer prices is just icing on the cake. So basically the tone of my post was more in the order of "with great power comes great responsibility" or even " For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required". I think your system in its $2300 kit configuration is the end all solution for 3d projection and the missing link after that is simply to pair it with the right consumer projectors (if such exists) for the best results. I didn't want to say that and be proven wrong but i'm hardly ever wrong about haunches and that is my haunch.