Talk:Overhead projector

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Previous discussions without headers[edit]

Can we get a timescale? They were common up to the 1990s, but when did they first appear? -- Tarquin 20:47, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Likewise, I learned in a technology-in-the-classroom class that they were introduced in the early 1940s by the US military for training purposes. Is there a patent application somewhere? Daniel Case 07:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is full of weasel words and it is very biased. There is little useful information here; this article does not qualify is a reasonable encyclopedia article. For example, I often use overheads for presentations at work when I'm presenting detailed diagrams; all but the most expensive ($20k) digital projectors lack the resolution for all but the most simple diagrams. Why is this reality not noted in the article? Sure there are advantages to digital. But shouldn't this article be factual? Erikvcl (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, newer is not always better, and in many ways a computer is less easy to use interactively than standing by an overhead with a marker in hand. But this a wiki, so please stop whining about the article and fix what you think is broken. DMahalko (talk) 04:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still both Powerpoint and transparencies?[edit]

"While a computer projection system eliminates the need to create hard copy transparencies (which can be quite expensive, particularly if made in color) of the slide show presentation, many presenters make both in case the computer hardware fails."

Come on now, really, does any of you still prepare backup overhead projector transparencies in case the digital projector fails??? That used to be the case up to some 6-7 years ago, but not any more. Apart from that, for all the other overwhelming reasons that favour the use of digital projectors mentioned in the article, it's pretty difficult nowadays to find an overhead projector available in a conference or a meeting.

Best regards, Antonis (25. Nov. 2010) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.48.133.8 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tempted to state: "Overhead projectors with transparencies were in wide use in business from the 50s and into the 90s when computer projections of Powerpoint presentations obsoleted the use of transparencies with overhead projectors". However, I have no source other than my own experience.

I'm also thinking that a section should be added which places overhead projectors in a progression of analog display technologies such as slide projectors, film strip projectors, film projectors, and overhead projectors into digital projections using a combination of a computer and a display. Since I'm a newbie, I think I'll just put it here on the "Talk" page and go do some more reading before I actually update a post. (yes, I probably should be in the sandbox or playbox still... Johned13 (talk) 18:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Verification[edit]

I have doubts that this is a reliable source—currently ref 1: Projection Apparatus History. GitHub/Pedago [1] Tony (talk) 10:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced it with a better source. Graham87 10:13, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]