Everyone who's hip to home theater knows the state-of-the-art in video is a constant-height projection system. And everyone who's hip to home theater also knows they can't afford one.

Or can they?

Even to a neophyte, even at just a glance, even after just downing a whole bottle of Boone's Farm, a constant-height video system looks awesome. Constant-height systems use a 2.35:1 Cinemascope-style screen along with an anamorphic lens that either stretches a projector's 1.78:1 (16:9) image horizontally or compresses it vertically to fit the 2.35:1 aspect ratio. The benefits, as we've discussed previously, include better resolution, a potentially brighter picture, and a more involving, more cinematic feel.

While the cost of a constant-height-capable projector has dropped 15-fold — from about $30,000 three years ago to around $2,000 street price today — the outboard gear still costs dearly. Prices for most of the anamorphic lenses and the motorized "sleds" that move them in and out of a projector's light path run about $6,000. For the guys who experience not a whit of worry when they write a $25,000 check for a Runco projector, another $6K is no big deal. But for the rest of us, it's hard to reconcile spending chump change on a projector while paying more than double that for an extra lens to go with it. Seriously — a lens doesn't do anything! It's just a chunk of glass! And the projector has one built in already!

We figured there had to be something cheaper out there. And there is.

Panamorph's UV200 Universal Anamorphic Lens only costs $1,995.

DOING IT LEGIT

Four companies dominate the market for anamorphic lenses: Panamorph, Prismasonic, Schneider Optics, and Isco (which is owned by Schneider).

So — in the case of Panamorph, for instance — is there any way to drop down below the $6,000 retail price of a horizontal stretch lens and a motorized sled? "Sure," replies Panamorph general manager, Dave Carty. "Our least expensive lens is the UV200. It's an all-glass vertical compression lens that retails for $1,995."

Like other vertical compression lenses, the UV200 is most often mounted permanently — i.e., it's always in the light path. This configuration saves you $995 on a motorized sled. To use this lens, you need a projector that has image processing for a vertical compression lens.

In a constant image height setup, the downside of vertical compression systems is that about a third of the chip/panel surface is "thrown away" when you drop down to a 16:9 picture (because of the horizontal image squeeze processing that the projector or external video scaler must perform to present 16:9 images with the same vertical height on a 2:35:1 aspect ratio screen). Obviously, 4:3 images suffer even worse than 16:9 ones

You can remedy this problem by installing a $995 sled to move the lens out of the way when you're watching 16:9 or 4:3. Or if you're skilled with tools, you can devise your own manual sled using a few parts from Home Depot.

Even though the UV200 costs only $2K, you're still spending as much for the lens as you might for the projector, and you're losing some performance in the process. (Plus you'll need a 2.35:1 screen of some sort, but we'll discuss that shortly.)

U.K.-based Prismasonic's H-700M looks like a better choice for cheapskate Cinemascope. It's a horizontal stretching lens with a "pass mode" that lets the light from the projector pass through unaltered when you're watching 16:9 or 4:3 material. Though you have to twist a knob on the lens to activate the pass mode, the whole package runs only about $2,000 — and you suffer no loss in resolution. Motorized versions that switch in and out of pass mode by remote control start at about $3,800.

DOING IT YOURSELF

Now that we've discussed the accepted, legitimate, squaresville, high-roller way to do constant-height, let's get into something way, way, way cheaper. There's a whole 'nother category to consider, which I'll call "guerrilla two-three-five." With guerrilla 2.35, constant-height doesn't cost $40,000. It doesn't even cost $4,000. No, it costs a mere $180.86, assuming you already have a projector with a zoom lens.

You start with the 2.35:1 screen. The least expensive one I can find comes from the eBay store Screen Discounters. The company's store page doesn't mention 2.35:1, but if you search for "2.35 screen" on eBay you can find plenty. Diagonal sizes in fixed screens range from 85 inches to 125 inches, and the screens are available in 0.9 gain gray material or 1.5 gain matte white. Prices run as low as $119.99 for the 85-incher in white, but they kill you on the shipping — $60.87 to ship to Los Angeles. Still, it's amazingly cheap. I'm pretty sure it doesn't match the performance of a Stewart CineCurve, but then again, it's roughly 1% of the price.

You could also use screen paint. Goo Systems makes a range of them; just brush them on your wall (make sure it's a flat, un-textured wall) and you have something screen-like. Goo even offers "screen flok" — long strips of black velvet with stickum on the back that you can use to create a pseudo-frame. A full kit with base and top coats, screen flok, and a suitable roller runs $229.

Once you have your screen, how do you get 2.35:1? Just use the projector's zoom to fill the screen with the 2.35:1 picture. When you want to watch 16:9 or 4:3, zoom out until the picture fills the screen top to bottom (you may have to adjust the vertical positioning a little, so projectors equipped with vertical lens shift controls work much better here).

Unfortunately, guerrilla 2.35 requires playing around with the projector whenever you want to change aspect ratios, but it works, and you don't have to worry about degrading the picture through an anamorphic lens. However, you'll suffer the same loss of vertical resolution as you would with a vertical compression system.

Prismasonic's H-700M (about $2,000) is a horizontal stretching lens with a "pass mode" that lets the light from the projector pass through unaltered when you're watching 16:9 or 4:3 material.

DOING IT HARDCORE

If you're exceptionally enterprising, preternaturally patient, and equipped with a full set of snazzy rechargeable tools, you can actually create a real horizontal stretching system for less than the cost of replacing your projector bulb.

Many do-it-yourselfers have employed prisms — or curved, mirrored surfaces — to create homegrown horizontal stretch anamorphic lenses. The best explanation I've found of how to do this uses prisms made from un-engraved crystal award plaques, like the kind you get when a magazine proclaims your product Best of the Year. You'll probably get some optical anomalies, including darkening and color fringing at the edges of the picture, but maybe the sense of pride you'll take from making your own anamorphic lens will balance out these problems.

There's also the possibility of using an anamorphic lens from a theatrical projector; used models are readily available on eBay for $100 or less. However, these lenses were designed for use on film projectors, not video projectors, so their focal lengths will not be optimal and they'll likely require either some funky mounting or modification. While I found plenty of information on the Internet about DIY anamorphic lenses using prisms, I found precious little about using theatrical lenses.

DO IT OR DON'T?

Could you just wait and hope prices for anamorphic lenses come down? "I don't really see that happening," says Panamorph's Carty. "Our lenses are a lot larger than the ones in projectors. They have to be in order to accept an image from the projector's lens, and to do the image expansion. Our UH480 lens weighs 10 pounds."

The good news is, if you already have a projector, you absolutely, positively can afford some kind of constant-height video system. Whether or not you'll want to put one together can only be determined through a complex equation with three variables: your proficiency, your patience, and your pocketbook. And that one, we can't help you with.