I got my Darbee six days ago and I've had some time to try it on a range of content:
On my 1080p Mitsubishi HC3800 projector, I've watched Batman Begins, The Dark Night, and Babe: Pig in the City (ugh) on Blu-ray. I've also watched two episodes of Breaking Bad, 720p video files through my PS3.
On my 720p Acer H5360BD projector I've played Skyrim and Minecraft in 3D through my PC.
In all cases, the Darbee provides a noticeable and welcome improvement. I'm using it in HD mode 55% most of the time and I find it brings out the details, especially on faces. Judging by my eyes only, the Darbee'd image simply appears to be the true image vs the degraded original. My conscious brain knows I've in fact got that reversed, but luckily for my eyes I don't have a philosophical objection to the process! I have nothing bad to say about the effect.
Economically speaking, the Darbee has been an excellent treatment for a recent flare up of my chronic upgraditis. For the price of the Darbee, everything I have is upgraded. My Blu-rays, my PC's graphics, everything. The fact that it upgrades both of my projectors is also huge to me. They share the same screen, same AVR, and now the same Darbee. I just switch out the projectors' respective cables at the Darbee's HDMI out at the end of the chain at a convenient location in the room (same as how I switched between the two before, except I used a spare HDMI splitter to manually plug and unplug). My upgraditis has cleared up nicely, and hopefully I've relatively cheaply bought myself another 6 months until the next episode. However, while I want to show the Darbee off to my friends, I'm afraid it might induce upgraditis in them. One man's cure is another man's poison. Apply with caution.
On another topic, my understanding (and I've read the white paper) it that the Darbee is intended to put the stereoscopic 3D depth cues you'd get with two images into a signal 2D image. I wonder what merit the Darbee has then (biological, philosophical, etc) when using it with 3D material. When viewing stereoscopic 3D, the depth is all there plain to see as it should be. With the Darbee engaged, it would seem then that you're doubling up on the depth cues. Your left eye gets an image embedded with depth cues it would have seen with two eyes, and the right gets the same. So in 3D, the Darbee is trying to give you something like what you would have seen with four eyes? It doesn't seem like that should be right, and yet it clearly looks better anyway, so I'm left a little curious.