Why Matrox and not a Projector?

[Eddie Armaos]

Hi,


i just saw all these posts for the Matrox 3 monitors solution and i'm
wondering why you prefer this solution than a 1024x768 projector with the
same money?

* Almost all the projectors from 3meters give a wide screen about 1,8m, so
you can also make the zoom 0,50

* Also you can use it in every hardware change (new PCs and FS), without
waiting new drivers

* And at the end no radiation.

Just need to know you opinion, today i only have one monitor for external
view, but in the feature i was thinking to buy a projector.


regards


Eddie

[Peter Dowson]

On 1/10/2006 2:06:55 PM, Eddie Armaos wrote:
>i just saw all these posts for
>the Matrox 3 monitors solution
>and i'm wondering why you prefer this
>solution than a 1024x768
>projector with the same money?

I suspect mostly it's the space needed. Ideally I'd have three screens with
three projectors driven by the fastest Parhelia I could get! ;-)

Incidentally, I do have a good projector with my 737NG cockpit setup, but
only the one, and it's cost far exceeded the cost of a Parhelia and three 18"
TFTs (more than 3-fold in fact,more counting the screen). But maybe I'm
rather fussy? I wanted a 10' wide image in a room not long enough, so had to
pay a *lot* more for a wide angle lens for the projector.

Then there was the little matter of resolution and brightness. To be really
as effective as a monitor, projection really does have to be very bright,
and this adds to the cost. And to compete with Parhelia 3 screen resolutions
of anything from 2400x600 to 3840x1024 is hard to do with cheap projection
as well -- mine gives about 1400x800 (approx, figures not to hand) in 16:9
widescreen mode, which is good.

Horses for courses?

Regards,

Pete

[Michel Vandaele]

Hi Peter,
What is finally the distance between your projector and the wall to obtain
your image and what size does it has ?

Many thanks

Michel
"Peter Dowson" wrote in message
news:380979.76436@wb.onvix.com...
> On 1/10/2006 2:06:55 PM, Eddie Armaos wrote:
>>i just saw all these posts for
>>the Matrox 3 monitors solution
>>and i'm wondering why you prefer this
>>solution than a 1024x768
>>projector with the same money?
>
> I suspect mostly it's the space needed. Ideally I'd have three screens
> with
> three projectors driven by the fastest Parhelia I could get! ;-)
>
> Incidentally, I do have a good projector with my 737NG cockpit setup, but
> only the one, and it's cost far exceeded the cost of a Parhelia and three

> 18"
> TFTs (more than 3-fold in fact,more counting the screen). But maybe I'm
> rather fussy? I wanted a 10' wide image in a room not long enough, so had

> to
> pay a *lot* more for a wide angle lens for the projector.
>
> Then there was the little matter of resolution and brightness. To be
> really
> as effective as a monitor, projection really does have to be very bright,
> and this adds to the cost. And to compete with Parhelia 3 screen
> resolutions
> of anything from 2400x600 to 3840x1024 is hard to do with cheap
projection
> as well -- mine gives about 1400x800 (approx, figures not to hand) in
16:9
> widescreen mode, which is good.
>
> Horses for courses?
>
> Regards,
>
> Pete
>

[Peter Dowson]

On 1/11/2006 2:56:50 PM, Michel Vandaele wrote:
>What is finally the distance
>between your projector and the
>wall to obtain
>your image and what size does
>it has ?

Lens front to screen is about 13' (4 metres) and the screen image is 10'
wide, exactly (3 metres) with a 16:9 image being used.

The projector could have been a little closer or a little further back -- it
is an Hitachi CP-SX1350. The lens is a zoom wide-angle lens with vertical
shift capability, very expensive. There is an even wider lens which would
allow me to get the projector as near as about 9 feet (2.75 metres), but that
lens is fixed focal length, not zoom, so would require much more precision
in its ceiling mounting, and at 9 feet it would be high over the cockpit,
very difficult to reach if ever needed.

The advantage of getting the projector nearer (apart from, in my case,
avoiding having to make a big hole in the rear wall to accommodate it using the
standard lens!) is that the cockpit itslef (with its roof sporting an
overhead panel) can be put nearer the screen, for a wider-looking result. In my
case I managed to get it with the pilot's eyes some 6-7 feet from the screen
without the cockpit roof casting a shadow on it. This is only possible in
16:9, which is why I changed to it.

Lok at the cockpit -- it is not home-built, I am no good at such things -- it
is the PFC 737NG, www.flypfc.com.

Regards,

Pete

[Michel Vandaele]

Hi Peter,
Thanks a lot for all the info. I still have to decide on my visuals -
very informing.

Nice cockpit setup from PFC for the B737. Honestly I don't like the
building too ;) but I have to do it for my B744. I prefer to fly the
thing, not building it ;)

B. Rgds
Michel

> Lok at the cockpit -- it is not home-built, I am no good at such things --
it
> is the PFC 737NG, www.flypfc.com.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pete
>
>