| SuperZoboo |
This is just a start, but I have a form where you can submit your projector details, your name (alias), location and website and I'll add the information to a page with pooled info. Hopefully this collection will help new users and current users evaluate setups and order parts.
Check out the form
Check out the Results (so far)
oh, and btw, any and i mean any criticisms and suggestions are welcome. i realize this is a really basic form. |
|
|
| MikeZupcak |
| Thanks Biteon for your awsome reply! |
|
|
| biteon |
i have not tested my theory ,there for im not sure it works. but i should be done making and testing with in the next week cause i think i found a store in my town that has low-e glass in stock.im gona go cheak it out to day.the guy at the store said it gots a little tint to it and a little reflective on one side so im thinking that may be a problem cause tint is usally plastic and may melt, but the reflective side i think might not be a problem if i face it toward
the lcd panel. well in a hour im gona go cheak it out. ill tell you guys more on what i think of it after i see it.
:D :D :D :D |
|
|
| MikeZupcak |
| biteon, can you post the links where you got all your parts? thanks |
|
|
| MikeZupcak |
| Does anyone know where i can find a 5 inch or smaller 16:9 LCD? |
|
|
| eebasist |
Where can low e glass be purchased, and at what cost?
Marklar, what is the diameter of the lens/aperature on your light source? |
|
|
| biteon |
i got this stuff
at ebay i got this:
warbirdrelics.com Description: NEW F-1 Delta IV Projector Lens
Price: $25.00
STARAUDIO@AOL.COM. THIS IS A 5.6" COLOR LCD MONITOR WITH FULL FUNCTION REMOTE CONTROL. COLOR, BRIGHTNESS, CONTRAST, AND POWER ON/OFF CAN BE ADJUSTED BY REMOTE CONTROL OR MANUALLY BY THE FRONT CONTROL BUTTONS. THIS MONITOR HAS A HIGH RESOLUTION OF 960 X 234 DOTS AND HAS A DOUBLE VIDEO INPUT. IT WORKS ON A 12 VOLTS POWER SUPPLY AND IS AUTO PAL/NTSC. CAN BE CONNECTED TO DVD, VCR, PLAYSTATIONS 1-2, TV TUNER OR CAMCORDERS. SHIPPING AND HANDLING IS $16.00 WITHIN THE USA. WE HIGHLY RECOMMEND THIS MONITOR. $130.00
then i got this at the local stores:
two fresnel 8x11 (page magnifier) $5.00 each @ staples
flat black spray paint $5.00 about@ ace
roofing sheet metal $? @my house
one pack of 12"x12" mirrors 6 in a pack @ rite aid for$about $15.00
one sheet of 1/4" 4'x8' board @ my house $0.00 for you maybe $15.00 @home depot
3/4" screws @home depot $?
havac duct pipe thingy @ ace $? metal pipe or sheet metal etc. will work.
jig saw $?
glass cutter @ace $5.00
metal snips@ace $?
wire@radio shack$?
computer power supply? $?
extention cord@ ace $?
400watt metal halide bulb ms400/u ,mogul base socket,& ballast @electric distributers in gilroy but you can by one on ebay for less that $100.00 look at grow light section or metal halide.
and a soddering thing@ radio shack$?
and 1/4" low-e glass at home depot (they may have to order it)$?
and three 3" fans @radio shack $15.00 each it's a rip of i no but i should have when to a old computer salvage place and probly get them for $2.00 each
and then i still think you should think about what your doing cause for one i think i need some better stuff for instants a higher res. lcd panel cause when playing wide screen movies its not perfect due to lack of res. and same gose with those guys at the small diy projection forum, cause they're using low res. lcds.but i havent been there for a while maybe they found something that works.
:D :D :D :D |
|
|
| MikeZupcak |
| Wow thanks for all the info! I can't seem to find a lens anywhere and i still really want to use a 16:9 format. Any way I could make a lens big enough for a 7" LCD using a large magnafying glass? Or should i try just using a fresnel? |
|
|
| biteon |
some of the guys said that the lens(es) have to at least be as big as the lcd but i think thats a crock of $h*t. they say that they cant get the full lcd to display,but when i used a 2" lens with my 27"t.v. along time ago,it displayed the whole screen.
the only reson why i got the deltaIV lens is cause i was stuppid and thought it had zoom capabilitys. i do agree that bigger and glass is better but for different reasons. why do i think bigger is better cause more room for more light to pass through. look up pin hole projection. i projected my computer 19"moniter through a 1/8"pin hole and 2" away on to a paper it projected the whole moniter screen(small and fade but the whole screen projected), there for im right there wrong well thats what i think. kinda like the ohp project some people are doing. the lens is only about 3"D. and there lcd i more than 8".
i no that my lens setup that i have has that problem with getting the whole screen but i think its because i can sorten the housing enough to ajust it to work the whole screen.
plastic lenses some work some suck and some dont work.
but after telling you this i really dont no what you should do or lens you should hook up with. maybe some one else can help you like undream or some one.
:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: |
|
|
| *_if_I_know |
Hello,
I've been interested in all of the great ideas going on in these threads. I have not fully committed myself to it but I am thinking about it. I have 2 broken Toshiba 510CDT laptops that I am willing to experiment with. Just one problem, they have a 12" viewable screen area. Any suggestions?
I have been looking for light sources and found some cheap stage lighting equipment. The Followspot lights may be something. Please take a look.
http://www.performingartssupply.com
Pages 23 & 24 of their catalog.
Hey Mike, Altman makes a large assortment of lens. Don't know exactly where to buy them but take a look.
http://www.altmanltg.com
http://www.altmanltg.com/parts/pdf/lensglas.pdf |
|
|
| biteon |
i dont no if those light will work, but if u can find one that the bulb puts out 40,000 -60,000 lumens and last more than 3000 hr and the bulb replacement is less than $100 buck with a glass fresnel lens it just might workout, but ive never messed around with stuff like that so i would sujest reading the web or talk to people or etc.
:D :D :D :D |
|
|
| xblocker |
biteon,
you are correct, projection lenses/objectives don't need to have the diameter of panels size. This is indeed bulls**t which has been over and over transported through several threads. If this was true there wouln't have been neither working commercial big panel projectors nor OHP/panel projectors !!
There's only one mandatory condition: Focal lenght of objective has to be minimal diagonal size of the panel ! Better more.
And another point: The use of only a single lens as projection lens will always end in poor results due to spherical abberations !! It isn't possible to focus image's center AND corners properly with only a single lens. It will only work good with correcting elements, doublets, triplets...
Some guys should correct their website informations about this, espacially for newbies!!!!
xblocker |
|
|
| *_if_I_know |
Hey,
How about lighting a mirror backed LCD from the front so the light is filtered twice through the same pixel [if possible] then sent to the screen via a focal lens. |
|
|
| xblocker |
1.Transmitting the panel twice means a double loss of light!
2. The mirror will offset the transmitted pixel in relation to angle of incidence.
No good!
xblocker |
|
|
| Duo |
| When you use two or more lenses to get the edges focused, how does that work? Can both lenses be the same kind of lens? |
|
|
| *_if_I_know |
Hey,
What I'm talking about is an L-shaped projector but where the mirror would normally go there would be an LCD display with a reflective backing which would send the video light down through a couple of lens for focus, then to the screen.
Just thinking. |
|
|
| xblocker |
Duo,
mostly after the first convex lense there's a concave lens cemented, followed by a third which is convex again. This is a common setup.
But there are also simpler objectives which use 2 convex meniscus lenses, my first OHP had this setup. If using more than one lens the formula goes like this: 1/f=1/f1+1/f2....+1/fn
This all has already been discussed in the 1. thread....
*_if_i_know,
are there any color LCDs without backlite but refexive foil built in?
If yes, it could work, but poorly, because you have no condensor, which collimates the lightbeam, like a fresnel mirror does.
xblocker |
|
|
| *_if_I_know |
Well, I'm not sure.
But I was researching and found a review of a projector, which stated that image quality, and efficiency of light was gained by reflecting the light off of the LCD. Of course it did not include any details of how this was done.
Oh it did state that micro-mirrors were used.
--- Probably each pixel area with its own concave mirror |
|
|
| Duo |
hmmm, what defines a meniscus lens apart from a normal one?
I'm thinking of using a 2.5inch lcd and a metal halide bulb and a fresnel lens to collimate the light, but i'm unsure what kind of lens setup to use on the projection side. I'd like to get a picture about 150" or slightly less diagonal on my screen...:cool: |
|
|
| jco9w |
Xblocker-
You are right about not needing a lens that is the size of your panel. However, I have to disagree about needing a doublet (or triplet) with a focal length that is minimally the size of the panel being used. If you have a fresnel before your panel, then the light coming through the panel is converging and you can use whatever focal length doublet or triplet you want - as long as it is large enough (in diameter) to catch the converging cone of light. The practical reason that the focal lengths of typical doublets on OHP's are at least a foot, is to give the proper magnification to get a big image. Using the following equation
(focal length x screen width) / panel width = throw distance in inches
which is the same as
M = F2/F1, where F2 is throw distance, and F1 is focal length of the lense, and M is the magnification
Using these equations you can determine the focal length you need to get the size on the screen you want in a certain throw distance. This is how the
OHP's work. Now it is not by accident that the focal lengths turn out to be greater than the panel width, take for example:
throw distance = 10 ft = 120 inches
6 ft screen width = 72 inches
10 inch panel width
so now plug into our equation
FL= (TD*panel width)/screen width = 120*10/72 = 16.7 inches
So long focal lengths come directly out of this equation, but you could use shorter focal lengths,
you would just get a bigger magnification.
Anyway, this is how I understand things, but if you know something I don't, I would love to hear it! So, let me know what I am missing.
BTW I totally agree with you about needing a double or triplet, without them you will get chromatic and spherical aberrations, plus even higher order effects. That being said they could turn out to be small effects, which might be why Undream's picture looks fine. I have a buddy that knows how to use Z-max (a ray tracing program), and I have been trying to get him to model this, he said he would, but he is kind of busy building real astronomical instruments. Anyway hopefully I will get some kind of model going here sometime.
Thanks
J |
|
|
| xblocker |
jco9w,
watching the interdependence between fl, object size and imagesize, you're right about the formulas. But now let's assume we have a projection lens with a fl=2" to project a 10" panel. You would have a field angle of 2*cos(2/5)=133degrees! Now tell me, which projection objective is capable of doing that? This must be a very special wide angle objective. Not to talk about a single lens! Another critical point is lens thickness and aperture. The thicker a lens, at a given FL and aperture, the more disturbing elements concerning imaging come into game. Excellent obectives have an F-ratio of 1.0, which means aperture diameter = focal lenght, this also is only possible with corrected lenses.
We cannot only discuss magnification ratio without looking at quality. There have to be always compromises between math calculations and real physical-optical components.
Also, the bigger (steeper?) the transmitting angle of light through LCD the poorer the results, but thats another topic.
In Photography all big format cameras have longer FLs than mini formats...Why?
well, all in all i cannot see, why this shouldn't be the case for DIY-projectors. Make yourself a test with 10" panel and a slide projector objective and tell me what you can see!!
(grr, what a torture in english!)
xblocker |
|
|
| jco9w |
xblocker-
You make good points. My goal in the previous email was not to say that practically you weren't correct (in fact I showed that you do need a long
focal length), but to make sure people understand the physics. Agreed, you need a giant diameter lens if it has a short focal length, and they are hard to come by and can cause other problems, however, you could (in theory) still make it work.
Point being, a rule of thumb is a rule of thumb and physics is physics. Your rule of thumb works well with the projectors we are talking about, but
I didn't want people to come away that it is the law.
Anyway there is no need to argue, I agree with you about the focal lengths, I just thought that I would put the formulas out there so people got the whole story.
J |
|
|
| Duo |
hmm, I just calculated with my setup that I'd need a lens with a Fl
of 3.6" for a 2 inch lcd and a 100 inch screen at a throw distance of 180"... Is the feasible??? Or will it work... And how to I work things out if I'm gonna need more than one lens to eliminate aborrhations?:confused: |
|
|
| xblocker |
jco9w,
i agree, i only made some points, because i often see a big lack of information about optical systems here.
Duo,
with a 2" LCD you're nearly in the dimension of the slide projectors. I would try any objective of an old slide projector or modify such a projector. Look at the small LCD projector thread. There you can find a lot of hints. You can also try 2 mensicus lenses, each with about 7" FL to get a total of 3,5".It should look like that: ( ) . Eye glasses have meniscus shape. I experimented a lot with used or missworked eye glasses, which i got for nothing from an optometrist.
Good luck!
xblocker |
|
|
| Duo |
| haha, my glasses and contace have an fl of about 3, but I'm nearsighted so the lenses are concave not convex as far as I know... Where is a good place to get lenses of these types if I can't find them at the optometrist... Also, did you have any luck with the lenses from glasses? |
|
|
| xblocker |
Duo,
Eye glasses with focal lenght of 3? What measure? And, are you talking bout FL or dioptrics? Dioptrics are defined as 1Dpt=1/f (f in meter,Germany).
I don't understand why opticians shouldn't give away defective lenses. I've already built simple telescopes and projection objectives out of it. So what!?
You also can try 2 planconvex lenses. In every case it's better to have 2 thinner lenses than 1 thick!
xblocker |
|
|
| Duo |
| hmm, good point, my glasses could mean that number in a different way. Anyhow, I know very little about lenses: whats a planconvex lens??? |
|
|
| CHRLUC |
| Hay guys just a note about low E-glass this is not a great thing. If anyone has ever seen low e glass it looks like tinted glass. The loss in light transmittance is any ware from about 25% to 35% and there are more problems, the glass really has a "shelf life" due to oxidation problems. Not to mention that glass itself is pretty opaque is anyone has ever seen a case if glass… you cannot see thru it! So too much glass can be a problem! Just a thought. |
|
|
| remp |
Thats a good point
Any thoughts on other types of glass or other transparent material. |
|
|
| woneill |
Hi Guys,
Ok, you got me - yes you CAN have an image bigger than the lens and still project an image. :eek:
e.g. a "pin-hole camera" can focus the image of the sun onto a screen, and it is probably safe to say that the sun is generally bigger than most pin-holes... ;)
However, if you want to catch MOST (if not ALL) of the light from the image produced by an LCD panel, and not just a tiny fraction of it, then you must either use a very big objective, or use some form of lens before/after the panel (at least as big as the panel) to focus the emerging light rays towards the smaller objective.
In effect, in almost all projectors, there is an optical stage (collection of lenses) that is as big as the image being projected. In the OHP, it is the fresnel under the glass panel, in other projectors it comes before/after the image.
The two issues many people seem to be objecting to are:
1) my statement inearlier postings that the objective should be bigger than the image. (This WAS too general - my bad - I should have talked about having an optical stage bigger than the image.)
2) the use of a fresnel after the panel rather than before it. (This seems to be a philosophical issue. I still maintain that the image degradation by such a lens placed after the panel is much less (when the fresnel is placed properly) than the degradation that occurs in trying to use an equivalent fresnel to focus light "through" an LCD panel from behind.)
Most of the TFT panels around today are not good optical filters - just hold them up to a lamp at the other end of the room and look at the lamp through the panel - in most cases you will see scattering and a diffuse image of the lamp due to MLA layers designed to collect as much light from a diffuse CCFL source as possible and funnel it through to the front with the widest viewing angle possible. This is not 100% compatible with the concept of forcing light through from behind at a very specific angle needed for it to reach the smaller objective in front of the panel.
Some LCD panels were specifically designed for OHP work, and they are much better in this respect. Others weren't...
As in all science, theory takes you half-way there, and practicalities take you the rest. I apologise, if in being too general I was giving bad advice.
Bill.
P.S. I still think the optimal arrangement is to have the light entering the LCD panel from behind, perpendicular to its surface, and then having the emerging light focussed towards a powerful, optically corrected objective by a low power, large diameter lens. (The lower the power, the less aberations etc.) And, as always fresnel lenses are poor compared to a nice optical glass lens. |
|
|
| woneill |
Xblocker,
You mentioned how large format cameras generally have larger FL lenses than the smaller ones. The main reason for this is perspective.
In 35mm photography, a "normal" lens is usually quoted as 50mm. This lens gives roughly the same field of view (perspective angle) as the eye - producing a "normal" looking picture.
Wide-angle (35 mm FL and below) give a much wider field of view, and telephoto (70mm and up) give a much narrower perspective. (Never do a facial portrait with a wide angle lens - noses can become enormous...) :D
For the larger format cameras, the image is projected onto a larger area of film, and the dimensions of the cameras are such that to achieve a "normal" perspective, you need a longer focal length lens. The larger the format, the longer the lens...
Bill. |
|
|
| Electro |
Using an LCD screen and a very, very bright light to project the image on a white object has some cons.
1) Needs a very bright light.
2) Bright light produces a lot of heat.
3) Fan needs to be used to cool off the light emitting device.
4) Needs a large lens
5) LCD screens cost to much.
6) Visible black lines on the projector when sitting 6 feet away from the source.
There are so many other cons when using a LCD and light emitting device. I think using lasers might be of some interest. Lasers act like electron tubes but lasers can be much finer in detail. Laser diodes, found in CD players and laser pointers, prices are coming down. There are red and green laser diodes but blue laser doides are coming soon. The next best way besides using laser diodes is LEDs. LEDs can handle a lot of voltage around 10 times their orignal forward voltage. Laser diodes can not handle this amount of voltage.
Lasers work on scheme of pulsing a high voltage to a light emitting device for a short period. LEDs can be great for projecting like a laser. For more information go to How Lasers Work
LEDs come all sorts of colors such as red, yellow, green, orange/amber, purple, and blue. The colors need to emit all the colors in the rainbow are red, green, and blue. Each color has its own brightness so adjustment is needed for accurate color.
I found a circuit in my books that uses a LED to be used as a laser. I will post it if anybody have some interest.
Below is a reference:
Iannini, Robert E. "Build Your Own Laser, Phaser, Ion Ray Gun & Other Working Space-Age Projects". TAB Books. 1983 |
|
|
| Undream |
| quote: | Originally posted by Electro
1) Needs a very bright light.
2) Bright light produces a lot of heat.
3) Fan needs to be used to cool off the light emitting device.
4) Needs a large lens
5) LCD screens cost to much.
6) Visible black lines on the projector when sitting 6 feet away from the source.
|
1: This one is true. Whaddya know, you are 16.667% correct.
2: They don't produce a lot of heat. in fact, I even accidentally bumped into my MH bulb that had been burning for 45 minutes and didn't get burned.
3: Actually, they don't need to be directly cooled. Marklar's setup has a single fan mounted in the back, and isn't even pushing air upon the bulb. Most of these bulbs are designed to be in closed fixtures like street lights and things like that.
4: completely and utterly incorrect. I can use my ~3" diameter overhead projector lens to project my 10.4" diagonal LCD panel. You are just plain wrong. Want an even smaller lens? no problem. you can find one that will work. I just decided to use my 5 7/8" lens because it seems to work slightly better, and I want to use parts in my projector that can all be purchased again for cheap.
5: $100 is too much? How much would you spend on LEDs or Lasers? More importantly, how many man hours would you put in trying to get something like that to work? its all relative, I don't think this is an issue.
6: Put it slightly out of focus. Problem solved. Personally, I'll be sitting 12' from the screen, so, I'll be able to sharply focus without problems. |
|
|
| jvisaria |
electro,
no offense, but we have been over this before in the old thread. You might want to check out the laser projector thread if you are interested in that route. My personal opinion is
DIY+moving parts=breaks a lot. |
|
|
| xblocker |
woneill,
agreed, my point was someting different. I mentioned the relation between math formulas and physical reality. One the mathematical side, we could theoretically get shortest FL and biggest magnification, but not one the physical side, 'cause real lenses (the thicker they are) unfortunatly produce many undesirable side effects, which can be only eliminated with a bunch of correcting elements! That's why it IMHO would be better not to choice a FL below the diagonal of the panel.
xblocker |
|
|
| Undream |
Latest from the frontlines...
you'd be surprised what you can do with a cordless drill, a 45 cent protractor, a hand saw, and a calculator. damn I need some decent tools :\
Lens mount/front assembly. turned out darn good.
from the front
here it is, not fully mounted, but, just slid on so you can see what its gonna look like. Not beautiful, but, it should work. Still have to mount 4 focusing bolts/wingnuts, cut some vents for the LCD panel, figure out how I'm going to get the LCD panel remote to work, put on one or two more braces, and then of course, mount/install the four feet that its going to be standing on. Sucker is heavy altogether. really heavy. |
|
|
| Jason |
| IMG tags are now turned on... they are off by default when creating new forums... |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
finally back from vacation. i got to pack 5 things to ship after i sold them on ebay....dammit.
ok, Undream, is that NEW design of yours actually any smaller than the previous one. it looks like it is as long. maybe i am wrong.
and why are we all talking some bull$h!T about how we need to calculate the optical problems. when the major problem we need to work on is getting i smaller LCD. i have searched all around, but all i get is some cr@p. if it is small, resolution sux. if resolution ans other parameters are ok, it is too big.
you see, i can make a projector right now. it will work pretty much like Undream's, and be about the same size, but i do not wanna waste time.
i think that we all need a better LCD than the one that projection panel has to offer. am i not right?
solution comes at the cost of wisdom.....
aleksey.:) |
|
|
| remp |
prjctr_builder,
Some people are happy with what a projection panel can do.
Some people like you are not. They want more lumens , more resolution, more contrast, more vibrant colors, more of everything. There's nothing wrong with that except a panel is not going to drop into your lap is it.
We got the technology and the skills now here on this thread and the one before just one thing missing. A suitable panel.
Ok why don't you take a good LCD monitor rip it apart and use that. Good contrast good colors. Because as has been found it can be impossible to remove the electronics out of the way, and too big.
What about a smaller LCD monitor. Are they available. Do they have the right inputs. Can the electronics be shifted.
Answer Yes/ no/maybe
I learned a valuable lesson year or two back when I was searching for polygons. Email someone for a price and availablity. Answer. No sorry none available. Everytime. Reason. My enquiry was too small and too simple. The office girl could answer it. So I made my enquiries much more complex specifying optical parameters etc so it had to go to an engineer. After that I always got an answer with prices. As soon as I included specifications Asian suppliers emailed an answer within 2 days.
They love specifications. They think you are an engineer.
So if you are looking for LCD panels and getting nowhere, make a plan. Lets call it Alecksey's I am going to get a panel plan. Thats AP for short.
First of all how many inputs, what res and dont go overboard on that or you'll end up paying for something you never use. What do you reckon. Just video or video + computer. Say 800x600 just for fun. You need svideo.? You need other inputs.? Stick em down.
Now what size you want. 6 inch panel ok. Say 5-8 inches
How about a LCD monitor in that size range. Anything in the shops. If there are you will have to get on the right side of a tech see if the electronics can be moved out of the way. Chances are very slim because most are chip on glass. That means they dont worry about a pc board just glue stuff straight on the back of the lcd. Sometimes the glass panel is big enough to allow projection so its worth looking. The outstanding advantage of a monitor is you can see how good it looks before buying.
Contrast. Typical panel =100:1. Not spectacular. You want at least 400:1
Colors. You have to specify colors or they will send you a black and white panel. Its all powers of bits. 16 bits ok 24 bits better but of course the more color you have the faster the panel electrics have to be to display all those colors or else it guesses an approximation. I would be happy with 24 bit color.
Smearing. I assume you are looking for full motion video so that goes into the spec list.
Ok now you have a spec for a panel. Where to buy.
Well your best bet is Taiwan, South Korea or China. If you go for South Korea dont forget to tell them how wonderful they did in the World Cup Soccer. Probably send you one for free.
Normal search engines are useless for this sort of stuff. You have to get a lead on Tiwanese LCD manufactiurers there are only about 400. The best place is Global services. Search for that. Register. Tell them what you are interested in and you will find them very helpful.
When you have narrowed your search down to a handfull of manufacturers then you can hit them with your spec list.
While you are waiting have a look at LCD-252. It was in #1 thread. Not a bad little panel. Video only full color removable electronics (looks like) and $85 + $25 shipping to your door.
Nobody caters for DIY people. Their orders are too small so you have to have a plan to prize one out of them. If plan A doesnt work plan B or plan C will. |
|
|
| dice45 |
remp,
:) ROTFLMAO :) exactly that's how it works and never forget to inquire price reduction for larger quantities and to ask if samples are available. Offer to pay for the sample but if they crowd you with a gratuious one, accept with grace :) |
|
|
| remp |
I already asked for free sample. What does #*@ #&!!%% mean in Taiwanese. I think it means no free samples.
Google lcd-252
LCD-252 $85+25 shipping could be more/less shipping cost to your location .
2.5 inch
NTSC/PAL video
Resolution 480x234
Contrast 120:1
Operating temperature 60 degrees centigrade.
Picture shows the electronics on a movable panel.
Too low resolution to be useful??. If they make one like this chances are they make a better one that could be very suitable.
Price was quoted by email 2 months ago. May have changed since then.
Can't remember who posted this but they should get credit for it. |
|
|
| remp |
| Correction. Global Sources is the place. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
i checked out all the links that undream has on his website, and the ones that refer to LCD panels just sell cr@p. they are aweful. the panels have low res, contrast and stufflike that. and worst of all they are about 300 dollars at least. what is going on?
i think that we need to try to take our panels apart and use the LCD only. like you know how the top end sharp panels have a nice contrast and resolution, maybe we could use them. and 10.4" is not that huge. i think that i can live with the parameters that panels have to offer.
aleksey:( |
|
|
| remp |
Ok
Thought you wanted smaller lcd. Global sources lists most Asian lcd. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
yesssssssss, i have purchased the QA-2500 yesterday. omg, i am so happy. i can't wait for it to get here. :)
aleksey:) |
|
|
| Invictum |
| Hey prjctr_builder, where did you purchase yours from? |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
dude, ebay is the place. you can get anything there. i got my panel, QA-2500, for $280. i think that i got a good deal. ended the auction with BUy Now. i know those panels go easily for $320+. if i won't like it, i'll sell it.
aleksey |
|
|
| eebasist |
| What are the specs of the QA-2500? |
|
|
| robv60 |
| All i want to know is what search words did you use to find the 2500 on ebay? I have been scouring ebay for weeks trying to find one and have yet to come across one! Aaaarrrgghhh! |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
now all of the sudden everyone is intersted in my QA-2500.
i just contacted one of my friends who was selling it one ebay and he made a private auction for me. i ended it with BUY NOW, and he pays for shipping.
here are the specs.
Actice TFT Matrix
True XGA (1024x768)
150:1 contrast ratio
100khz refresh rate
computer, VHS, DVD, and audio inputs.
all the functions you can get, frame freeze, Zoom...etc.
5 lb weight
yes, this is the best projection panel available to us, at a reasonable price.
i have a friend who might sell one really soon. if you want one , please contact me and i will TRY to arrange the sale. :)
ok, ask me questions!!!
aleksey:) |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
and if you want to find one on ebay, type in
PROJECTION PANEL
and just look for the one you need. some people do not even know what they are selling and because of that you might get lucky.
aleksey:) |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
and to add some more to the specs.
24-bit color ( 16.7 million TRUE colors)
most of the panels claim to generate as much, but they do it digitally. Sharp panels 1800 and up have a special chip that generates TRUE 16.7 million colors. that is why the quality of those things is so good.
i will provide you with an article, that talks about this chip.
QA-2500 is a KILLER:)
aleksey:) |
|
|
| mycamel |
While trying to figure out how to keep my panel cool, I ran into this. Its a film used for stage lighting in high power lights to kill most of the heat while allowing most of the light to pass. Cost looks to be $20 for 1 square foot.
http://www.premier-lighting.com/sal...t.htm#screenout
:D |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
nice!!!
aleksey |
|
|
| Invictum |
| prjctr_builder, if it's a decent panel (one with 16-bit + colors that can display motion video), I might be interested in buying it off of him. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
QA-2500 does a lot more than that....
aleksey |
|
|
| Invictum |
| Oh, I wasn't certain if your friend was selling the same model, or just a different one that he wanted to sell. My mistake. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
i will see if i can get him to sell one of his....he has 2.
i will tell him to contact you directly
aleksey |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
here's some specs on QA-2500
QA-2500
The Sharp QA-2500 is a 24-bit color LCD projection panel featuring 1024 x 768 resolution and 16.7 million colors. The device offers 1280 x 1024 image compression and displays computer images such XGA, Super VGA, and VGA from multiple platforms. Contact: Sharp Electronics Corp., Mahwah, NJ; (201) 529-8731.
and this site talks about TRUE colors.
http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A318.cfm
hehe
aleksey
:) :) :) :) |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
anytime
aleksey |
|
|
| ap0the0sis |
Hey everyone,
(This is a Duplicate, New thread was added accidentally. Tried to delete it but wouldn't let me)
Im new to your club but have been following homemade projectors for quite sometime. I must say that i have gaind some usefull information from your last forum. I know this one will be even better....
I ran into a little problem and im hoping that someone here can help me out. Don't worry, nothing technical
About a week and a half or so i placed a bid on an auction on ebay for a nView Projector panel Z210. When i won this auction the seller contacted me with the payment information. I then asked him a question on this panel and i never received a reply. Few emails and 5 days later and still nothing. So i went back to ebay and placed another bid... and won.
Now this guy popped out of no where saying that he was away on vacation blah blah blah, so he still has this panel for sale and i am in no need for it.
Would anyone be interested in purchasing this panel off him? He claims it works correctly, comes with remote, case, all power cables, serial cables, rca and s-video intputs and is an 800X600 res. Perfect for projection panel theater displays.
Total with shipping is $101.51 (Great deal if you ask me)
If so please contact me at orlando_rodriguez008@yahoo.com
or contact him directly:
Michael Christianson res0m73t@verizon.net
Thank you very much,
ap0the0sis :p |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
are you obligated to buy this panel? If you ask me, i think that you should shop around and get sharp-1800. i think that Sharp panels are the best ones available to us. maybe i am wrong.
aleksey |
|
|
| ap0the0sis |
nahh, im not obligated to purchase the panel from him. i won an auction for a real sharp lcd projector. im just trying to help him sell it so he wont have to re-post it on ebay. i've heard from several people that these nViews work pretty well in OHP set-ups.
ap0the0sis |
|
|
| jco9w |
Everywhere I see, the nview Z210 is a 640x480 native resolution panel. Just thought everyone should know that before they decide whether they want it. Perhaps it can interpolate to 600x800, but I haven't seen it listed anywhere as native 600x800
J |
|
|
| ap0the0sis |
My Mistake, jco9w is is right. 640 X 480 is the correct res.
ap0the0sis
:D |
|
|
| Axeman |
Hello again all,
I used to contribute to this thread a while ago, but haven't posted much since. however, I just bought a telex Magnabyte M2x 640x480 projection panel locally, and I'm back in the game. My panel's contrast is my only real concern(don't worry, I'll review in good panel/bad panel), and I found this link that might offer hope to those of us with grey blacks. :D
http://itri.loyola.edu/dsply_jp/c2_s3.htm |
|
|
| Mobius |
Hi, I've followed the first thread since it was 5 pages long so I wouldn't ask if it wasn't already answered.
I recently received an Nview Spectra C. Disassembly indicated that it was an Nview Viewframe Spectra Plus. The two video inputs are a 15 pin analog and a 9 pin digital computer input. The panel came with no cables so could someone give me a pinout of these connectors?
Also, I have no manual for it. Will it automatically switch from the logo screen to the active input?
Thanks for any help. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
does anyone here know where dudes like Undream and Multiplexor went?:(
aleksey |
|
|
| Invictum |
Is that your friend's one? Because he hasn't contacted me or anything yet. I'm still interested BTW.
Oh, and sorry I was so brief with what I said yesterday. I just had my teeth pulled, and I was in a lotta pain. I wasn't exactly able to concentrate :eek: |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
i do not know who the dude is, but i know one thing for sure, this panel is the best, and it is in an excellent condition.
aleksey;) |
|
|
| Undream |
hey guys, little depressing update.
I spent all last weekend (july 6-7) working on my enclosure. since the latest pics I upped, I've added some cool chrome handles to carry it around, and some feet so that it sits up off the ground a bit. So, after I was done, I decided to take it for a test run on Sunday evening..
I plugged everything in, and began to try to focus. It wasn't going into focus, so, I slid the front lens assembly as far as I made the slots, and it was STILL out of focus. I totally messed up the measurements of the front lens assembly - it is 10" too long!!!!!
So, I have to chop 10" off the front lens assembly, and then re-design how I'm going to focus. I just dont know how I'm going to do it...
In addition after I found out how much I messed it all up, I at least ended up taking off the lens mount and holding it up to the completed box for kicks.
Its just NOT BRIGHT ENOUGH when displaying on my 16:9 91 1/4" screen. Its really not bright enough. i don't know what to do now. Should I put time into making a new reflector? I'm really, really considering buying some cheap mirrors, a glass cutter, and maybe like a large funnel or something that would resemble Marklar's reflector, and just going to town cutting up the mirror and glueing it on in little pieces on the funnel. My other option is just to jump to a 1000W bulb. I can sell my 400W ballast/bulb/base setup on ebay for $90 or so, and a 1000W setup costs around the same.
So, anyway, my miscalculations are sending the length of my box from ~38 inches to less than 34 inches. Thats good in the end.
On top of everything that was going wrong, My panel began to overheat after ~10 minutes. I didn't have a panel of glass in the box though, so, I wasn't really sure how it was. Plus, I think I've gotta cut out another hole in the bottom of the box because the Sharp 1750 has vents on the top and bottom. prolly sucks air in through the top and blows it out the bottom(actually opposite because my panel is mounted upside down in the box)
Anyways, I'm just trying to get over the failures and find motivation to try again. Advice on the brightness problem? Its not THAT bad. Its better than the pics on my site. But, thats just not enough for me. Marklar's looks much better. |
|
|
| Invictum |
I'm sorry to hear that :(
And I'm not sure a 1000 watt bulb would be a great idea. It'd draw a ton of current, and need a lot of cooling. Not to mention the fire risk. But I'm sure you're careful, and it could work.
I wish I could be more help. I hope you find some way to fix this though. |
|
|
| Gunawan W |
Hi guys,
last time I posted what I did with fresnel panel, based on wonneil experiment.
I think this is one of the basic principle how to pass the light thru the LCD panel.
To illuminate the entire surface of LCD panel evenly (no hot spot), the light rays must hit the panel at 90 degrees on entire surface, ie: parallel light rays.
To get that rays, we need first fresnel panel placed on its focal length toward point source light.
To collimated parallel rays after leaving LCD panel, we need second fresnel panel placed close to LCD panel, before the rays hit objective lenses.
What surprised me is: placing second fresnel panel close after LCD panel doesn't or just very slightly affect projected image quality!
I need some help from you guys to proof it, because if it works, it will reduce the light source power and elliminate the hotspot problem.
Or, should we forget this basic principle and go on with common setup: light - fresnel - LCD - lens?
Wonneil, since you're the first throwing this setup, how's your progress so far? Do you still use this setup for your projector?
see you. |
|
|
| ajira99 |
| Gunawan W - This is exactly what many manufacturers used in their designs for single-panel LCD projectors. I spent some time looking through the US Patent database quite a while back. One of the major problems is finding affordable, quality fresnel lenses with a short focal length so that you don't have to build a 5 ft. optical cavity. I wish I could find some for my 5.6 TFT panel. |
|
|
| Gunawan W |
Hi guys,
Here I posted link, thank's to SushiMasterX from Small Panel projector thread:
http://www.oes.itri.org.tw/en/ptv-e.htm
Summary:
LCD panel swallow 2/3 of the light.
single panel type has lower resolution (cause it requires RGB pixels in a single panel, and requires color filters) lower brightness (because of the filter will absorb 2/3 of the light).
MH light is the most efficient so far.
The system urgently requires a high efficiency, short arc gap, long lifetime metal halide lamp.
Reflector
Spherical mirror mostly use on single panel LCD projection system.
Is this same as fresnel panel?
Integrator to uniform the distribution of light, and convert the circular illumination area into a rectangular area as the LCD panel.
big size PCX lens should be a good choice
the projection lens needs to have long back focal length, larger relative aperture, and the collection efficiency needs to be higher.
is this called a hotspot?
The development of uniformity is even faster, in the early days the uniformity is between 30% to 50% without integrator.
The increase of uniformity also improves the non uniformity of the light difference chromatic aberration on the screen.
Don't laugh!
Another noticeable thing is reflective type LCD projector, as shown in fig. 4, the term reflective means the LCD panel is the reflective type.
We're on the right track
the rear projector is more appropriate than the front projector for home use, and big screen, flattened, high resolution are always TV orientations.
Sony too, using big panel like us:)
The other way is to maintain the pixel area and increase the panel area, like in SONY, SVGA is 1.3ˇ¨, XGA is 1.8ˇ¨, and SXGA is 2.4ˇ¨, the system become larger as the panel area increases. |
|
|
| Axeman |
| Sorry to hear about your problems, undream. I think that your MH bulb is definately bright enough though. If a 2200 lumen OHP was bright enough to watch TV and movies in a darkened room for me, then your bulb should be more than enough, it just needs a reflector. keep in mind that a good reflector can double or triple the light output to the LCD and eventually the image. Just a thought. |
|
|
| jason1971 |
Undream,
When I first started out, I went from a 400w to 1000w because I didn't think that I was getting enough light. I have now switched back to 400w and am going to try to get a more efficient use of the light. I may switch back if I end up with the same problems as you. Just to let you know, the reasons that I switched back to 400w were that the heat was quite a bit more with a 1000w and although it could be addressed, I wanted to avoid it if possible. Also, the bulb is much bigger, which makes for a much larger reflection box. Finally, the ballast that I had, made a considerable amount of noise, so I probably would have needed to place the ballast and housing in a remote location and then run the socket wires to the projector. It was a brand new ballast and housing, but the noise was comparable to an old refrigerator, although some may be quieter, I think that a louder hum is just the nature of what one can expect from the 1000w variety.
None of the issues that I found are insurmountable, but I just wanted to give you a heads up on what I had experienced so you can take that into account. |
|
|
| eebasist |
1000W is definitly overkill. You will have a horrible heat issue to deal with wich equals noise and a hot room. You need to work at a more efficient use of light......my personal idea wich i havent tried out het is to simply get a stage ellipsoidal light...gut the bulb and put a 400W MH into it.......you get an elliptical light with a variable focus lens on the front and you should get some awesome results......its much along the lines of Marklar's setup...he uses an elliptical downlight, using a stage ellipsoidal will give you a much larger aperature to let the light come out than with Marklar's setup (wonderfull as it is).
Personally if i didnt have 2 bulbless projectors to work on I'd buy a cheap stage ellipsoidal and do the panel thing with it. |
|
|
| ap0the0sis |
Hey peeps,
I was at home depot the other day looking throught some ligting fixtures and ran across a few bulbs with the following specs:
Bulb Application:
Halogen/Quartz Bulbs
Watts: 350 watts
Volts: 120VOLTS
Base Type: Recessed Single Contact
Life: 3000 hrs.
Lumens: 10,000
Nominal Length: 4.69"
Manufacturer: General Electric Co.
SKU #: 494152
UPC #: 043168122832
Price $7.99
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bulb Application: Halogen/Quartz Bulbs
Watts: 500 watts
Volts: 120VOLTS
Base Type: Recessed Single Contact
Life: 2000 hrs.
Lumens: 11100
Nominal Length: 4.69"
Manufacturer: General Electric Co.
SKU #: 742597
UPC #: 043168993807
Price $4.97
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems to me like these might work since they are small, powerfull, cheap, and widely available
ap0the0sis :D |
|
|
| eebasist |
| problem with those quartz halogen things are they are way way to hot......you remember the fires that the halogen torch lamps caused....now there are protective screens over them. Also, with those lamps we are looking at a ribbon of light 2-3 inches long wich by no means close to a point light source so you are almost guaranteed light loss. Enclosing these in a container that isn't metal is asking for trouble IMHO. And even then the heat is still too much |
|
|
| ap0the0sis |
eebasist,
in your opinion which would be the ideal existing bulb?
ap0the0sis |
|
|
| woneill |
Hi Guys,
Undream,
sorry to hear about your problems - you are one if the inspriations on this site!
There must be a better way to feed light into one of these panels than what most people are doing - I believe that if we can perfect the light source, then fantastic things will happen!
I believe that raw power is not the best way. The single panel system is horribly inefficient compared with the three panel designs, but it does work! Quite well! (Though it does seem that 400 watts are required to drive it - my original setup started with a Sharp QA 1100 on a Dukane Sunsplash with a 400 Watt FXL bulb. It works, even though the bulb is only halogen because the bulb is small enough to be effectively focussed.)
The original revolution in desktop projectors, which brought them into the mainstream, was the Proxima 2800 - using the same FXL with a 6.3" RGB panel. In its later incarnation they squezed 300 ANSI lumens out of it!
There must be a way to capture the light effectively, and I really believe that a smaller, (possibly lower-power) bulb, if it's light output were more effectively used, could give better results than many of the 400 Watt MH beasts (Marklar's excepted...)
I am currently awaiting a couple of prisms from Surplus Shack so that I can explore using them to merge multiple small collimated beams into one. My current light sources are only 55 Watt Fog Projector lamps with a condenser on the front (VERY collimated - small filament bulbs), but if things work, I could up the power rating of the bulbs (110 Watt), put four of them together, and have a lumen equivalent of a single FXL, but using much cheaper and longer life bulbs... It is a long shot, but it might open alternative doors...
It may, or may not be the answer, but while the 400 Watt MH bulbs are bright, it seems VERY hard to use many of the lumens generated.
Gunawan,
I did continue the experiment with the fresnel after the panel, and it is now my default configuration... I DID cheat on one setup, though - rather than order a $40 fresnel from Fresnel-tech, I gutted that Proxima 9100 projector, and put the electronics & panel from a Spectra C in there. Beautiful!!! (The 9100 is effectively an OHP with LCD panel integrated inside, behind a single fresnel...)
My other unit, with a cheap page magnifier raised over the LCD on my modified OHP is still there, but the Fresnel is not as good as the proxima, and I use a large 6" DCV lens between the fresnel and the OHP objective to reduce the "zoom" factor (including the fresnel into the optical path magnifies the projected image - as any good magnifier should - but the result is just too big for me...)
There is unfortunately some chromatic aberation introduced by the DCV, and I am currently waiting for some decent PCV/PCX cylindrical lenses to arrive so I can experiment with generating a widescreen image from a 4:3 panel... So, this rig is strictly experimental... Once things stabilise, I will probably do something to the main OHP objective to reduce the overall zoom without the chromatic aberations.
The 9100 has some interesting other optics too, though - they use non-linear front-sided fresnel prism mirrors to shape the light beam (from a narrow collimated beam, to a wide collimated beam). This allows them to reduce the height of the unit, but is interesting in that they are effectively using fresnel micro-prism technology to shape the beam from the bulb, and spread it out - this appears to give a more uniform light distribution than the fresnel lenses in an OHP...
Interesting stuff!!!
Keep at it everybody - you guys are awesome, and we are all very close to success!!!
Bill. |
|
|
| Timtimes |
I'll reply to the 'best light' question just to let you guys know I'm still alive out here. It's METAL HALIDE baby and the 400 Watt variety seems to be the one of choice. Now that I've addressed another newbie question (do you guys realize there is a several hundred page thread that answers these 'basic' issues? just wondering....)
Anyway, I got my NView Viewframe fired up and it works fine. I'm just waiting to get my hands on an overhead projector. I want to see what an 'out of box' setup can do before I get DIY crazy and start freakin' over optics/reflectors etc. I've decided to commit my setup to an outdoor (deck) environment so looks aren't going to be as big a factor. I just have to make sure it's waterproof.
In the end, I think I'm going to end up (GASP) buying one of the mid range commercial projectors to use in the house. Either that, or refinance my life and get a plasma....
Enjoy. |
|
|
| woneill |
ajira99
You shouldn't need a massive optical cavity - especially if you are using a fresnel after the panel. The biggest problem with the fresnel placed just far enough from the panel to avoid moire effects, is that it magnifies the panel. One of the good side effects of this, though, is that it effectively increases the distance of the LCD from the objective lens (the virtual image produced is further away from the objective than the physical LCD), allowing the objective to be moved closer. (Another way of looking at this is that the fresnel and objective can be combined mathematically into a single virtual lens with reduced focal length... See the Excell calculators from the previous thread for details!)
If your light path is still too long, you could always use mirrors to "fold" the optical path a couple of times...
Otherwise, Gunawan gave a nice and precise set of directions for positioning the lenses in this configuration, including distances etc. earlier in this thread, and my experience (let the flames begin ;) ) is that this arrangement makes better use of the light coming through the LCD panel, than a small objective lens alone.
(Putting a fresnel between the light source and the LCD is intended to shape the beam of light emerging from the LCD panel into a cone, so that most of the light "should" pass through the objective. But, this arrangement was never designed to be used with LCD panels - it was designed to be used with transparencies that don't interfere with the path of the light travelling through them - they are effectively simple filters... Many LCD panels DO interfere with this beam shaping arrangement due to microscopic lenses being built into the panel itself as an attempt to maximise the light throughput and increase LCD viewing angle... Thus, light emerging from the LCD panel might never be seen by the objective - reducing the intensity of the projected image...)
My configuration is not perfect, because good fresnels are expensive, and most people (myself included) are playing with cheap page magnifiers, or the coarse ones from cannibalised OHP units. And, of course, a good fresnel is not as good as a good PCX...
There is still much for us all to learn here!!!
But, it IS good fun!
Bill. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
any of you dudes know what type of cloth is used on reap projection screens? and if you do, how much does it cost and where i can get it?
aleksey |
|
|
| woneill |
Aleksey,
What is "reap"? :(
For now I am using a white shower curtain velcro'd to my wall.
It is not perfect, but it is a better colour than my wall!
I am definitely going to go for two (bedroom/front room) of those Plastex Poly-Wall sheets from the Parkland folks, though.
Bill. |
|
|
| xblocker |
| quote: | Originally posted by woneill
Many LCD panels DO interfere with this beam shaping arrangement due to microscopic lenses being built into the panel itself as an attempt to maximise the light throughput and increase LCD viewing angle... Thus, light emerging from the LCD panel might never be seen by the objective - reducing the intensity of the projected image...)
[/B] |
woneill. the panels which we are talking about surely don't have microscopic lenses. Microsopic lens arrays (MLA) came up in the late 90s, but were mostly used in 3 panel projectors. I never heard of them being built in projection panels for OHPs, which most DIYers are using here. If they would exist in these panels, you wouldn't see anything looking throug them! And they wouln't work with traditional OHPs!
xblocker |
|
|
| CHARTO |
hi guys
Has anyone thought about going down the local breakers yard
and getting a spotlamp off an old car and fitting there own light
in it, the reflectors in headlight and spotlamps come in all shapes
and sizes i'm sure theres somthing we could use, cheep too.
I have decided to get one of those halegen capsule bulbs and try it out 300watt 240v no balest needed
http://www.ecwuk.com/disco_lighting/lamps/
my projector at the moment is 20" long 13" wide and 16"high
at its highest point
I'm using an ask impack 24 panel,wich has an 8 1/2 inch lcd
I still need to get a decent lense.
anyone in the uk know of a good place for lenses |
|
|
| Invictum |
I think that prjctr_builder meant "rear" projection screens, woneill.
BTW, I have been brainstorming lighting ideas, and we have 2 headlights in our garage that were supposed to go on a 1984 Buick La Sabre. Since we don't have that car anymore, they're open for use. They're both halogen, but I'm not sure of the wattage. I figure they already have the reflectors built in, so that's done, and they're behind glass, so heat won't be a problem. There are two problems though: 1. They rely on DC voltage, and 2. There are three prongs that come out the back. I'm not sure which 2 I would need to connect to power the light. Also, I have an old computer power supply that has a 12V line with 6 amps of power. Would this be enough to power 2 headlights? |
|
|
| Axeman |
| The 3 prongs are for low and high beams. One is ground, and the other two are positives for high or low beams. I've messed around with headlight bulbs and the ones I used drew around 4 amps or something, so you could probably use that power supply for one of them. |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
yes as a matter of fact i was looking for REAR PROJECTION screen material. if anyone has any knowlenge or ideas, please let me know.
aleksey:) |
|
|
| Undream |
| whelp, I just got through measuring focal distances of my fresnel, and, seems as though my light source was about 3" too close to it. It doesnt look like it would have made a HUGE difference, but, there is definitely something there. I'm going to remount the LCD panel and fresnel, (from about 9.5" to 12.5" from the light source) and see what happens. This will take a little work though, so, I probably wont have time until this weekend.. |
|
|
| icculus |
| my first attempt was with car headlights. not bright enough and color temp is too low. i tried using the new bulbs with the higher temp, but they are even less bright. this was a 6054 type bulb, probably the same as yours. i'm using ENX bulbs presently, and thaey are pretty easy to work with(small). the FXL bulb fits the same socket and has higher output but is significantly more expensive. i got my OHP for $50 and am using it as a learning tool. i suggest everyone who hasn't got one to get one. check out your local classified ads. there's plenty on eBay, but the shipping tends to make it not worthwhile. $.02 |
|
|
| prjctr_builder |
i can save you some time by saying one thing.....
if you want to use car headlights, try researching the Xenon projector headlights. we have the best chance with them in case they work....
aleksey |
|
|
|
