BHawthorne

I think you'll find in most cases where PhysX is implemented in any detail NVIDIA has money behind it. A developer would not favor one manufacturer over another without financial incentives. To do so is to alienate a faction of the target audience without gain in the process.

S3D works. I use it with my Optoma GT720's. Be mindful that 120hz projection with S3D glasses halves your brightness. Your projection is significantly brighter at 60hz without S3D glasses. Not sure what you mean by widescreen format? It works just the same with a span of 3 as with just one. I use NVIDIA 3D Vision kit with my circular screens. Yes, been using 3x1 and 2x1 setups with S3D without any difference than single projector. At issue with NVIDIA 3D Vision and 2x1 though I needed to buy a MViewer box to make the span at 120hz. NVIDIA Surround itself has no 2x1 mode nor can Matrox boxes achieve 120hz. AMD also has S3D options but I have no experience with AMD version of S3D.

Digging around I just ran into the Optoma ZW210ST and ZX210ST. I wonder if laser/LED hybrids have the same characteristics of running cool that LED projectors have? If so these two projectors are very appealing to me (2000 ANSI lumens) and I might swap my GT720's for these. They look to be very new on the market, just been released in April. These are the only LED based projectors with high limens and short throw lens that I've seen on the consumer market. 1280x800: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Optoma-ZW210ST.htm 1024x768: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Optoma-ZX210ST.htm

The larger the projection is the more spread out your light is (even in a pitch black room). You don't want to mess with anything under 1200 ANSI lumens preferable 2000+. I think you're mixing up terms and concepts. Traditional projector bulbs are UHP mercury arc lamps which are extremely hot. Nothing to do with DLP or LCD. LCD or DLP are the engines that are lit by the bulbs, not the bulbs themselves. LED projector bulbs are a whole different animal than UHP projector bulbs. LED bulbs typically never achieve over 300 ANSI lumens and on the rare occasion 500. Until technology has caught up and can give a 1200 ANSI lumen LED bulb, you really don't want it. LED bulbs have wonderful lifespan, but horrible lumens. Your eyes can adjust to the low lumens but your room is going to need to be 100% pitch black. My first projector in 2006 was 300 lumens and I hated it. I cursed the money I wasted on it. I suppose I could give you a side-by-side comparison of 300 lumens vs 2500 lumens. I have my old projector in the basement somewhere.

Do I like them? Yes, but price is a key factor for me.

The thing you need to be mindful of is that you want the shortest lens throw possible. Look specifically for projectors that are 0.48:1 to 0.52:1. I previously said look for 0.72:1 to 0.49:1 but then I realized what configuration you wanted to do. In order to do 4 or 5 sided rear projection within a room you need the shortest lens throws possible. I've seen some really good 0.49:1 projectors but never owned any yet. They would tend to be $150 more than the Optoma ones I ended up with. When you go multi-projector that cost difference gets exponential. I prioritized cost over lens throw spec. You'll really need to focus down on lens throw being a prime factor for projectors picked in order to get projectors that will allow the short distances required. I'll dig around later tonight and give you some leads on certain projectors. While I'm doing something similar to what you have in mind, I'll be experimenting with it in a large shop building that has room. If you plan to use a regular room in a house 0.49:1 lens throw will be imperative. I'm not suggesting this specific projector, but here is one 0.49:1 as an example. You can work the math needed with the link to see how things will work as far as distance requirements and mounting positions based on projection size. http://www.projectorcentral.com/BenQ-MP782_ST-projection-calculator-pro.htm What is the room size you are thinking about setting things up in?

My regular circular projection screen is front projection with Eyefinity 2x1L. The one in my sig is an old screen configuration I had in my basement I no longer use. I have a different screen and projector configuration now for my gaming setup. It looks the same but it's 2x1 instead of 3x1. Less bulb consumables and initial cost when only buying two instead of three. Here is a really basic 120 degree single projector setup. 100% portable screen and single projector design. Here is another 2x1L design I have in the Kansas Aviation Museum. It's using my old screen. The same one in my sig video. This is the same screen AMD used at the 6870 video card launch event and at CES 2011. I also manufactured two 2x1L portable screens in January for Aviation Xtreme: https://aviationxtreme.com/Flights_and_Prices.html The rear projection sphere design is a whole different proof of concept build. I'll build it in my workshop. Depending on your room size I can work through it with you for a design. I really am partial to Eyefinity 2x1 builds because of the cost of entry is much lower than a triple-head setup. Front projection, rear projection, different projector count -- I'm used to working up one-off designs. I don't just use one setup. I have several depending on the requirements needed. The reason why I'm humoring doing the sphere is I'm bored with regular circular builds and want to do something a bit more exotic. I've experienced the FOV of a 180 degree screen and still find myself wanting to have even more immersion and FOV. The rear projection sphere screen will end up being just one of many screens I already have. I'm not happy with just making one screen and calling it good. I'm a tinkerer by nature and like to experiment.

It's a no-nonsense projector. No real added features other than NVIDIA 3D Vision. It's a fixed lens projector so no zoom options. Good brightness at 1280x800@60hz. I've been using the GT720's pretty religiously since late 2010. The price is right. They're EOL though. Optima has since then replaced the GT700 -> GT720 -> GT750 -> GT750e All of them have the same lens throw and setup characteristics. At about 6 foot viewing distance 48-60" projection height looks good. The pixels aren't too big. Going larger than 60" or closer than 6 foot you begin to notice. By projection height I don't mean like how TVs or LCDs are measure diagonally, but rather the actual vertical projection height. These projectors are capable of a large wall projection. They are 0.72:1 lens throw. That means mounting the projector 7 feet back gives you a 10 foot wide projection on a flat surface. There are a few GT750 users on WSGF. One person I know is thinking about the GT750e. I can tell you a lot about the GT720. It's a known quantity to me. When I did all the events for AMD we used GT720 for the project builds. I've used 13 GT720's spread over the course of 10 event setups so far. Not one issue with any of them. I've used both factory refurbished and new. My personal set of three is factory refurbished. I've got around 1800 hours into my personal set of three GT720 at the moment. If there ever was a native 1080p ultra short throw I'd use that, but no manufacturers make them. My reasoning for the GT720 is it's a bright projector, S3D capable, ultra short throw lens and $500 price point. There is no other competitor out there that can claim all that at $500 that has a proven track record.

Is that the ejection seat from the 1:6th scale BBI F-15 cockpit model?

PhysX would be largely worthless. PhysX as an engine is doomed from the start because of it's proprietary nature. You don't use a physics engine that favors only half the video cards out there and gimps the other half through CPU emulation. The only reason to would be if NVIDIA threw money at you do implement it. There are much more hardware neutral options out there that work in more generic GPU compute capacities.

If anyone will do a Republic F-84F for DCS with SFM I'll pay a bounty of $500. I have all the relevant information you'll need for the project. I have all the maintenance manuals, flight manual, crew checklists, the 51 roll technical drawing microfilm set and I own F-84F-10GK 51-9345 and crew chief for the Kansas Aviation Museum F-84F-51GK 52-9089. Whatever reference you need I can get you including full access to both real aircraft if you're near Kansas. Let me know if anyone is interested.

In the particular rig I'm talking about, three GTX470. It's definitely driver related to 302.59 and Tri-SLI. Nothing a different driver can't fix though.

Here is an illustration of one projection area. Green: 800x800 area Green Line: The projection would be pre-warped to this boundary with 10% overlap outside for blend. Red: Pixels not needed. The only resolution that matters is vertical resolution. 1280x800 or 800x800 it's all the same pixel size. In order to project onto a tight radius sphere there is no reason to use any more horizontal resolution than would fall onto the sphere. Using more would just be wasting GPU processing power. Why process for 6400x800 when all you need to process for is 4000x800. 5,120,000 pixels vs 3,200,000 pixels. A significant difference in pixel to process. 4000x800 is not a lot of pixel processing. To give you an idea, 3840x1024 is 3,932,160 pixel and that resolution is not a tax at all on GPUs compared to 5760x1080 setups. 4000x800 is even less pixel count than 3840x1024. 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels (1080p) 3840x800 = 3,072,000 pixels (3x 720p) 4000x800 = 3,200,000 pixels (5x 800x800) 2560x1440 = 3,686,400 pixels (1440p) 3840x1024 = 3,932,160 pixels (3x 19") 2560x1600 = 4,096,000 pixels (1600p) 6400x800 = 5,120,000 pixels (5x 720p) 5400x1080 = 5,832,000 pixels (5x 1080x1080) 5760x1080 = 6,220,800 pixels (3x 1080p) Note, this design is processing half the pixel count a triplehead 1080p setup needs to. Also note that 5x 1080x1080 needs less processing power than triple 1080p does. Why use 1280x800 projectors instead of 1920x1080 projectors? Pixel processing requirements, lens throw capability to mount projectors closer to the screen and cost per projector (and lastly because I already have the projectors). The thing about projection is that the screen design dictates a lot about why things are done. Those extra pixels are projecting outside the surface of the screen. No need for them to be GPU processed. Looking at PeterP's diagram is basically what I have in mind plus the top projection bounced off a first surface mirror onto the screen surface. Projectors have thermal issues and can be mounted only in certain orientations. Mounting pointing down would lead to failure of the projector from overheating. The lua scripting is going to be the weak point in this with performance hit though. It points towards a deficiency that would probably need to be addressed in the future with engine optimizations. This setup is pretty limited in target audience, but it should also work in FSX/Prepar3d with custom camera views too.

I was going to buy one of those 60" domes in 2010, but the shipping immediately killed that idea. It cost as much to buy the dome as to ship it. It's also another reason why I'm humoring an inflatable sphere. size and shipping is not much of an issue on something that can be deflated and packed into a box. I just need to work out how to keep positive pressure on the ball with proper airflow. Gene Buckle uses some sort of logic circuit to maintain proper vacuum on his collimated display. I'd need something the opposite to maintain slightly posative pressure within the sphere while maintaining constant refreshment of the air within it. I'm thinking on piping it in through a circular floor platform to put it on. The idea is pretty out there and largely impractical but I think once the pre-warp is dialed in it'll be an immersive experience. The whole concept of 360/135 FOV is compelling to me in an interactive gaming environment. Same thing HMDs are going for but are still far away from achieving in FOV.

I looked at their options in 2010. Wrong size, wrong price, wrong configuration. Not sure you quite understand what I have in mind. 360 degree horizontal and 135 degrees vertical for Prepar3d and DCS engines. Eyefinity 5x1L using 5 projectors to cover the sphere -- each using 800x800 resolution covering 55x55" on the 2 meter ball with 10% overlap for blending. The whole idea is the most immersive projection FOV possible. I have 6 Optoma projectors and several Eyefinity 6 cards sitting around, so the hardware isn't an issue. Pre-warping can be handled by Sol7, SimVisuals or Immersive Dispaly Pro. :smilewink: It'll work in 5x1L when using Prepar3d and DCS with custom camera windows. The rest of the time it'll be regular 3x1L for typical surround games.

I'd just as soon the rendering pipeline code be optimized for multi-camera within a single display span. edge blending across networked computer sounds like a headache. Either way would ultimately be an improvement though.

I hope so, 302.59 has been horrendous for stuttering. I'm about ready to throw things at my computer.

The Hong Kong contact is having trouble understanding what I'm wanting. I might just get a regular ball and work off of it in my own machine shop. I don't really want to do it that way if I can get a 3rd party to do all the manufacturing though. Their balls are made of PVC material. Rear projection screen materiel comes in PVC material also. I wish I knew their language native so they'd quit running my request through Google translate. God only knows what it says after that occurs. :lol: I'm going to try a few more time to explain to them what I require. If they still don't get it, I'll just buy a regular one and use it as a pattern for my own material. I ran the math on the 2 meter ball size the other day. The projection area is good (between 4 and 5 foot tall per projection), the footprint area for the flat base inside the sphere also will be ok. It'll either be 48" or 55" diameter. 48" would give higher head clearance but I think I might prefer more floor room than head clearance. The floor will be piped for proper ventilation and pc cable run to the interior of the sphere for peripherals.

No woman, no dog? Sounds like something Bob Marley would sing. :lol:

PeterP would be the go-to guy to ask about doing that with custom cameras. He has a custom camera FAQ elsewhere in the forum.

Do you mean 2x1L? AMD can do 2x1 Eyefinity right out of hte box but NVIDIA requires an old install of XP and horizontal-span mode or a Matrox DH2G. NVIDIA Surround is only 3x1.

That's a neat trick considering the 4x4" demil process. It's difficult to fly beer cans. :megalol: I'm uniquely aware of what can and can't be bought. I own an F-84F cockpit and have a friend with an F-15A and B-52D cockpit. If you buy something it would have needed to of been chopped up into sections decades ago before policy changed. Owning stuff like that is super rare and even then we're only talking about cockpits, not full airframes. You're more likely to own a unicorn than get ahold of an A-10 fuselage section.:smilewink:

Yep, or translating back and forth between some formats can be problematic too. It's why he should best do his layouts in native DXF/DWG and not hop back and forth between something like Corel Draw or SketchUp. While Corel Draw is vector, it's not DXF/DWG native. He doesn't need full 3d modeling capability for solids for panels though with something like Alibre. It's an unneeded expense for what he's doing. The only redeeming value SketchUp has is it's free. It's horrid for CAD/CAM though. Until he decides to do the tub or anything 3 axis, he's golden with something that saves 2D and DXF/DWG.

Panels are 2.5 axis projects and really only need DXF or DWG. All you need is the free version of Dassault DraftSight. The person who is setting up the CAM tool paths just opens the DXF/DWG and uses that. http://www.3ds.com/products/draftsight/overview/

Interesting. You could always go old-school and get a Steel Battalion controller. I think a one or two people have made Windows drivers for it.