/vr/ - Retro Games

Pnce OLEDs become common, there will be no need for 200 ton radiation cannons except to play Zapper games.

Once OLEDs become common, there will be no need for 200 ton radiation cannons except to play Zapper games.

>>806784
Explain

>>806789
They're supposed to conquer the two major problems of LCD/plasma which is color quality and response time. The only thing that still isn't possible are light gun games because they depend on a scanning type of display (the gun detects the electron beam as it's racing down the screen).

>>806790
So then I would still need a CRT to play Duck Hunt

>>806792
Yes.

>>806784
Yes but what do we do until then. We're forced to use shitty LCDs.

>>806790
butbutbutmahscanlines

>>806798
Just buy/make a SLG/scaler

>>806784
Games will still be stretched/poorly scaled.

>>806907
It wouldn't be possible to have OLED displays that use the native NTSC resolution (640x480)?

>>806916
It's possible but it won't happen because the cost of producing them wouldnt be worth it for such a niche market.

>you will never own a 25" OLED SDTV.

>>806790
In fact the NES Zapper doesn't work this way, although many arcade light guns do. Duck Hunt simply draws a white box for one frame and erases it. The trick falls apart on LCD/plasma because the pixels can't turn off fast enough.

Thus it should theoretically be possible to use a Zapper on OLED panels, but other types of guns that detect the electron beam obviously can't work.

>>806916
There are 640x480 LCD panels still produced, but only for certain special uses like CNC equipment (not consumer-level displays). It's not impossible to imagine there could be OLEDs utilised this way.

I remember some retrogaming site where people talked about using old SDTV LCDs with C64s and whatnot. You get rid of the scaling issue, although those things were made in the early 2000s and have poor picture quality compared to current LCD panels. Also still no light guns possible.

>>806926

>>806926
The problem with LCDs isn't so much the scaler, it's the inherent response time of the pixels which can not only make Duck Hunt fail, but fighting games like SF will not work because the display will be 2-3 frames behind the processing. Thus even if you have an LCD that's native 640x480, it still can't handle fighters.

>>806931
I call bunk. Modern fighting game tourneys are all played on HDTVs, even by the pro guys, not oldskool 15Khz RGB monitors.

>>806934
butthatswrongyoufaggot.jpg

Actually fighter tourneys are played on OLED PC monitors, not LCD HDTVs

>>806931
This wouldn't be an issue but for the fact that HDTVs for whatever reason will not let you set 1x1 pixel 640x480, but can only stretch it to fill the whole screen.

>>806942
There's a good reason for that. If you could set 1x1 mode with NTSC, you'd end up with something like this. A tiny window box in a giant black void.

>>806948
Your pic touched on one of the main reasons for the demise of CRTs. 1080p isn't possible on them because you cannot focus an electron beam that tightly. Laws of physics and all that. You'll notice that when they did have HDTV CRTs, they were only 720p/1080i.

>>806942
My new Samsung HDTV would like to have a word with you.

And yes, it looks like >>806948

>>806952
You can get past 1080p perfectly fine with CRTs, just not at 15.6khz.

>>806952
>implying there arent CRT monitors with 2304x1440 resolutions.

>>806920
That is only if there is frame perfect timing since the white box is only on the screen for a single frame

>>806976
>And yes, it looks like >>806948
But why? Wouldn't it be trivia to upscale it to 1280x960 without dropping behind by any frames? Obviously you can't do this on a 720p display but there's plenty of room to do it on a 1080p panel.

>>807041
>wouldn't it be possible to upscale...without dropping any frames?

Do you even listen to yourself?

>>806934
>Modern fighting game tourneys are all played on HDTVs
No. They're not. They're played on OLED computer monitors - the same type of monitors the games were designed on.

If there were retro fighting game tournaments they would be played on RGB CRTs, the same kind of monitors the games were designed on.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

>>806976
I have a Sony HDTV and it will do 1x1 through the VGA and HDMI inputs, but not composite, which is what we're really after here.

>>807038
>That is only if there is frame perfect timing

If you had an OLED and the minimum level of signal processing*, Zapper games should be playable. Scanning light guns won't work of course. In theory you could program the firmware to simulate a CRT raster, but you'd burn the panel out.

*keeping in mind that CRTs do perform a little of this in converting NTSC into RGB - pure RGB signals require no processing at all

>>806942
I can't even do this on a lot of PC monitors. Like the box I'm using to type this is a Dell all-in-one model with a 1920x1080 touchscreen. There is no way that I know to set non-stretched lower resolutions on it.

>>807020
not same guy, but why were there no 1080p CRT TVs if it's technically possible?

>>807064
It was possible, they just didn't want to. Actually electron guns can be focused much tighter than you think because the beam has extremely low molecular density (it is after all just pure electrons)

>>807056
>If you had an OLED and the minimum level of signal processing*, Zapper games should be playable

That's exactly how modern fighters are played. They use OLED monitors running at native resolution, thus producing the same milliseconds response time of a CRT.

>>806934
>>807048
Mostly true, but some fighter tourneys are indeed played on LCD TVs and there's even a list of recommended models for it. But again, we're talking using the TV at native resolution which eliminates most signal processing.

>>807056
>Scanning light guns won't work of course

Does anyone know what light guns work like this? I know it was common for arcade games, but no clue about home consoles.

>>807072
Where is there a list of LCD TVs recommended by EVO?

I've seen their list. It has two displays on it, both OLED monitors. One is an out of control expensive Alienware and the other is out of production.

>>807074
Every other light gun but the zapper.

>>807078
Someone posted it on here once but I don't have the link

Nyoko Super Cobra for the N64. This is I believe a scanning light gun.

>>807087

>>807094
In the 80s, they also had light pens for computers which were just a gun in a smaller form and worked the same way (by detecting the electron beam)

>>807095
You could still get light pens for PCs in the 90s. I saw an advertisement for one once and it shows a guy using it with a Windows 3.1 desktop. They were a very niche product used mostly with CAD programs. Nowadays replaced by touch pads with a stylus.

>>807101
The original IBM CGA card had a connector on it for a light pen and so did EGA, but they took it out of VGA. Those later light pens you mentioned had a separate ISA card they plugged into and would only work if your refresh was set to 60Hz.

Here's a crappy photo of my two pvm setups.
The 14" on the right and was made in the mid 90's. The 20" is on the left and is from 2003, only about 100 hours of total usage in its life also.
I was lucky to find them and i love them both dearly. Having the 14" on my desk is awesome, I've almost always got a saturn game running.

>>807135
ugh. Whoops...

>>807094
The N64 had lightgun games!?

>>807258
No. That's a Saturn/PSX third party lightgun.

>>806790
Actually OLED is supposed to have faster response time than even CRTs because there is no smearing from phosphor decay.

LCDs technically render the picture from top to bottom like a CRT, however the pixels will retain their state as long as they have power, so there is no flicker. Active matrix generally fires each row of pixels all at once while passive matrix does them one at a time which is why it has reaaaalllly sllooooowwwwww response time.

>>806931
>The problem with LCDs isn't so much the scaler, it's the inherent response time of the pixels
There are LCD panels designed for arcade machines which are fast, but still lag more than CRTs.

>>806904
>>806798
XRGB simulates scanlines, but not accurately (in fact no emulator produces ones that look like a real CRT)

On real CRTs, the lines vary in width and pixels should also be slightly rectangular because they're rendered by the electron gun moving from left to right.

>>807376
we have a long way to go, but I think emulating scanlines, the type of shadowmask etc. is the best we're going to get to. Using OLED will only help to improve contrast and eliminate the lag problems of LCD compared to CRT, but you're not going to get accurate phosphor simulation.

>>807378
Fuck man, I'm not that autistic to care about scanlines. It doesn't matter to me if OLED doesn't visually resemble a CRT so long as I can use a goddamn Zapper with it.

Amazing all the millions of dollars and thousands of hours put into trying to emulate a 70 year old technology

>>807391
And a dead one too, alas

>>807367
OLEDs aren't bright enough to simulate a CRT raster. They're bright enough for black frame insertion, but that's an inferior solution because it increases latency.

>>807394
There are actually still some CRTs produced for sale in Third World countries, but they're junk models nowhere near the quality of a high end Sony of the 90s-2000s. Also bear in mind that these are for TV purposes and place all sorts of nasty digital processing steps between the receiving of the raw signal and the tracing upon phosphor step (due to sporting ATSC tuners)

>>807397
>OLEDs aren't bright enough to simulate a CRT raster

Doesn't matter. If you programmed the firmware to emulate a raster display, you'd burn the panel out.

but I do look forward to CRT level motion on a flat screen without any major side effects. LCD and Plasma just don't cut it, each has at least 1 flaw that holds them back

>>807405
Yes, because they're not bright enough.

>>807397
>OLEDs aren't bright enough to simulate a CRT raster

Continued...

Specifically, the electron gun creates a light pulse which non-Zapper LGs pick up. Thus it would be impossible to use them on anything but a CRT.

>>807408

>>807397 here

I didn't write that. Quit pretending to be me.

>>807406
>but I do look forward to CRT level motion on a flat screen without any major side effects
OLED doesn't have CRT motion because it's actually much faster due to the absence of phosphor smear

>>807397
The post you replied to had nothing to do with emulating rasters

>>807417
Oh sorry meant to reply to >>806920

>>807413
OLEDs are all sample-and-hold except for a few extremely expensive "professional" monitors that have black frame insertion and are unsuitable for gaming because of latency.

>>806934
Why do you retards always say this? MODERN fighting games are played on MODERN equipment...good for you.

Show me where people go to play Street Fighter II and I'll show you a fucking arcade you broken record.

>>806784

Nope. OLED is still sample and hold motion blur shit. I don't think anything is going to beat CRT in motion quality anytime soon.

>>807839
Phosphor glows residually, watch the yellow smiley face bounce on the black background on Super Genjin 2 on a CRT and tell me that's not a form of motion blur.

>>807839
120Hz LCD + emulator running at double speed (paused half the time) to compensate for the latency + LED backlight hardware black frame insertion. You could probably hack a LightBoost LCD to do this (controlling the backlight with a parallel port or something). The only problem then will be the artifacts caused by the temporal dithering, and AFAIK all 120Hz LCDs have this problem, but that's image quality not motion quality.

I recently bought a used Trinitron from Goodwill and it works beautifully and looks fantastic, but occasionally the whine picks up and turns into an ear-piercing shriek that dies down after a minute or two.
What are the causes and how can I fix it?

>>808090

It's the flyback, you could open the tv up and wedge a tooth pick in there but that's only a temporary fix.

Oh, and if you don't know what you're doing you could kill yourself in the process.

>>808251
Thanks.
Is there any real permanent fix short of replacing the flyback?
It's easy to find a new TV, but I'd hate to see such a nice piece of technology tossed out.

>>806798
Scanline generators look great, I wouldn't miss my CRT at all if I had a display like this.

Found this 14" Toshiba crt in my neighborhood. It's just what I needed!

>>808301
Scanlines are an artifact of the hack used to force progressive scan on a display that's intended for interlaced scan. They are not important at all. VGA DOS games used the same art techniques as console games but were intended for a progressive native display so they used line doubling instead. Nobody complained about the lack of scanlines.

Fake scanlines do absolutely nothing to solve the motion quality problems on a sample-and-hold display. That requires black frame insertion or a scanning backlight, and the vast majority of LCDs cannot support that.

>>808335
Are you theguy who's been searching and searching for a component input display under 20"?

>>808298

It will eventually get worse over time, I'm about to do this on the monitor in my arcade cab.

Only real fix is new flyback or a completely new chassis (which is the circuit board that connects to the actual tube itself)(on which the flyback is located)

>>808701
Man, that's grim.
Is there any reliable way to purchase parts that for consumer models, or am I just better off finding another TV?

I just got a Toshiba 30HF84 for free this weekend in hopes of being able to use it for my sixth gen consoles. It's a widescreen TV and has component inputs, which are both great for what I want, but it's labeled as an "HD" television. According to this site:

http://www.mediacollege.com/equipment/toshiba/tv/crt/30hf84.html

it has "480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i inputs" (with 480i and 480p capabilities being what I'm looking for), but it also says that it features "CrystalScan HDSC, which upconverts all signals to 1080i or 540p resolution," which sounds iffy. So my question is, will this be suitable for sixth gen consoles, or only seventh gen, or even nothing at all? Sage and my apologies for not retro. I would have posted this somewhere more appropriate, but this is practically the only forum I'm aware of with people who know a damn thing about CRTs.

>>808717
Sixth and Seventh gen should work perfectly fine on it. 540p (I believe) is essentially the PAL version of 480p.

>>807078

This long troll is fun but really, the display mostly used by fg tournaments has been the ASUS VH236H, an lcd monitor. It has latency, but low enough where it doesn't really matter. There are some others with similar / better latencies these days from dell / benq / newer asus models, but that's what people are referring to when they refer to the "evo" monitor. There are a few latger tv's with similar latency, but the options aren't very good

>>808723
They aren't talking about pal resses, are you serious?

>>808712

Nope, you'll just have to find a new one but that wont be for quite a few years I'm guessing

>>808717
I predict that if you feed it a 240p signal it will spaghetti and that it will have some lag on 480i signals as well, which may or may not be significant enough to effect your experience. It may also stretch 4:3 into 16:9 by default and it may or may not have a setting to change that.

I use a Packard Bell color monitor to play my games.
come at me.

>>808620
Nope, that would be me.

What brand would be better?

Sony, Sharp, Philips or Sanyo?

I noticed most old nintendo commercials used Sharp TV's.

>I noticed most old nintendo commercials used Sharp TV's.

That's because Sharp had an agreement with Nintendo, they built the Twin Famicom, famicom titler and TV's with built in famicom/super famicom.

muh tv

>>809127
That is really awesome, actually. I wish I had a Famicom TV.

>>807869
That was the point. OLED should have the fastest screen update of any display type because no phosphor smear.

>>807426
What is black frame insertion and what relevance does it have to anything

>>809208
He's one of those scanline autists who thinks 60hz flicker improves the visuals of a game when all it really does is cause eye strain

>>807426
>and are unsuitable for gaming because of latency

And yet, all modern fighter games are played with them and apparently without problems

>>809205
Really? That was the point of you saying that "nothing beats CRT"? That OLED is the best? Fucking liar, everyone sees through you now. Kill yourself.

>>809225
>>809208
60Hz flicker is actually terrible, but sample-and-hold blur is worse.

And NTSC being 60Hz was a mistake, it should have been 72Hz IMO. Would have made the flicker much less visible and eliminated the need for 3:2 pulldown (which is disgustingly ugly).

>>809205
Fastest update is pointless when the brightness is so low that you have to keep the pixel lit for the whole frame time. The only way you can get away with that is with high framerates (at least 120fps, and even 120fps is barely tolerable). That's not possible with the vast majority of /vr/ games.

>>809205

OLED's display update speed is irrelevant if scaling is still costing you frames.

>>809226

If you're referring to tournaments, modern fighters are played on LCDs at those. Like the ASUS VH236H at EVO.

If you mean at home, I fucking doubt any significant number of people have a pro OLED.

Modern fighters also have ridiculously long "tell" animations to compensate for high display latency.

>>809225
I hate scanlines, and if you can't see the improvement flicker makes to motion at the same framerate as the flicker rate you're blind or retarded.

I would like to point out that a major selling point of the ArcadeVGA is that it can play Street Fighter IV on a CRT at 60 frames per second.

"Pro fighting game players" might play games on LCDs...they might take it in the ass for all I know, I don't know shit about that. All I know is how many people get Street Fighter IV running natively in VGA or even lower resolutions on a CRT and love it. Seen it on YouTube.

These people sure as hell aren't "hipsters" I don't know where anyone's getting that. A lot of them are gnarly older British dudes. Some are such gnarly oldsters that they don't show their face, only the Sony broadcast monitor and the SFIV. CRTs, CRTs, CRTs. That's what CRT enthusiasts want SFIV on.

>>809279
Uploaded on Jul 7, 2009

Street Fighter Arcade - Street Fighter IV Bechmark

Intel 8600
radeon 4670 8 AA
All setting high
800 x 600 on regular sony trinitron 25" flattube screen CRT

watch?v=Gal5EgrX978

>>809279
>These people sure as hell aren't "hipsters" I don't know where anyone's getting that.

Can't say I don't find it amusing when random people on the internet call me this.

I'm far too old to be a hipster and likely old enough to be their father.

>>809279
>I would like to point out that a major selling point of the ArcadeVGA is that it can play Street Fighter IV on a CRT at 60 frames per second.
Wait, a normal video card can't?

>>809246
>it should have been 72Hz IMO
With the electronics of the day, you would have seen beat patterns on the screen from the uneven mains voltage.

>>809297
Most VGA cards can't output 15khz

>>809225
1. Play Quake at 120hz with cl_maxfps set to 60.
2. Now play Quake at 60hz with vsync enabled.
Option 2 looks noticeably clearer because of the smooth pursuit reflex in your eye.

>>809301
Which ones can't? Everything I've tried from old Rage Pros to Intel Integrated to Radeon HD series will do it just fine with the appropriate dot clock.

>>809256
>OLED's display update speed is irrelevant if scaling is still costing you frames
What does scaling have to do with anything?
>If you're referring to tournaments, modern fighters are played on LCDs at those
Someone else in here said that they were not played on LCDs

>>809293
>I'm far too old to be a hipster and likely old enough to be their father

Sure you are. You're probably 19 at most.

>>809225
60hz doesn't improve squat, which is why everyone during the Windows 9x/XP era always used to set their monitors to run at 75Hz. Way to get a migraine.

>>809317
>What does scaling have to do with anything

He likely was referring to using HDTVs

>>809338
Ok. I meant if you had an OLED display that was native NTSC resolution.

>>809327
You're missing the point. A scanning raster display doesn't have sample-and-hold blur. High-refresh-rate CRT is the best, but a slow-burning phosphor on a 60hz CRT is almost as good.

>>809339
>>809338
If you're being careful, and depending on your scaling algorithm, you can reduce scaling latency down to a few lines. Buffering the whole frame and then scaling it before output is a lazy approach.

>>809346
Regardless, CRTs do still have a little blur because of phosphor decay.

>>809347
It's too bad that most manufacturers only do half-assed scaling. An OLED with proper programming should not suffer any measurable lag.

>>809356
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMeLKOQ0ZhE

The phosphors decay completely in much less than one field. Obviously, this varies with the chemicals used, but the screen is generally not more than 1/3 illuminating at any given time.

>>809373
Run a CRT in a dark room and you'll see it takes longer than that

Unfortunately, there hasn't been enough testing of retro games with OLED displays to determine how well they would perform. It shouldn't have any serious problems if the scaler is good quality.

>>809375
Please, watch the video linked in the post.

I work for a display manufacturer (won't say the name) and can assure everyone here that CRTs were dropped from production for some very good reasons that need no elaboration. Nobody really wants those unwieldy dinosaurs back.

>>809387
>some very good reasons that need no elaboration
Please, indulge us.

>>809390
Weight, shipping cost, picture tubes that contain toxic lead, hard on the eyes, needs extensive adjusting to produce a good picture, dangerous to repair, screen burn, need I go on?

Also you know most CRTs really didn't make that good picture quality, people just looked at a couple of high-end models from the 2000s and thought they represent all of them.

>>809407
>Also you know most CRTs really didn't make that good picture quality, people just looked at a couple of high-end models from the 2000s and thought they represent all of them.
Those are the ones we can buy now, often for less money than a shitty Chinese LCD.

>>809407
>Weight
No impact on picture. Don't care.
>shipping cost
No impact on picture. Don't care.
>picture tubes that contain toxic lead
No impact on picture. Don't care.

>hard on the eyes
Using a computer monitor, with a fast-burning phosphor, at 60hz will produce noticeable flicker. TVs, designed for one fixed refresh rate, have slower-burning phosphors and thus don't suffer this as much. TL;DR don't use the wrong refresh rate and you won't see flicker.

>needs extensive adjusting to produce a good picture
I'm willing to make that sacrifice for the best possible picture.
>dangerous to repair
Maybe if you've never heard of proper grounding and discharge procedure. Yes, there are dangers. Yes, we know how to deal with them.
>screen burn
This is probably the one legitimate reason to prefer LCD over a competing technology.

>>809414
>Those are the ones we can buy now

Did I fall asleep and wake up in 2002? It's been quite a while since I could walk into Best Buy and see a Wega on display.

>>809421
>Did I fall asleep and wake up in 2002? It's been quite a while since I could walk into Best Buy and see a Wega on display.
Exactly; they're considered EOL so they're very cheap. Don't buy into forced obsolescence. If you really need a *new* tube, you can still buy them from professional A/V dealers. (You're going to pay dearly for the quality, though, and might as well just bit the bullet and get a Trimaster EL at that point.)

>>809420
If you worked in the business as I do instead of being a NEET that lives in your mom's basement, you would know that these are very big problems.

>>809426
>he posts on a video game board
>he expects people here to be employed or understand business

>>809426
They're big problems for manufacturers and distributors, as I'm well aware (familiarity with Sharp). That's not a concern when I'm a consumer.

>>809407
Forgot. Flat panels are much sharper and better suited to widescreen. There were few widescreen CRTs made and most were not consumer-level displays.

>>809435
Thus proving my point. If you worked in the industry, praising CRTs is a good way to ruin your career in a hurry.

>>809439
>widescreen
>>>/v/

>>809441
How does this matter in terms of what the best-performing display is?

>>809441
Don't bother arguing with the CRT cultists. They're like Jim Jones and the Kool-Aid. Last laugh is on us when their picture tubes die of old age and they can't buy a new one.

>>809441
>If you worked in the industry, praising CRTs is a good way to ruin your career in a hurry.
Someone ought to tell the marketing guys at Sony.

>>809323

These responses are cute too, and entirely predictable.

Do wish I had that those lungs back though.

>>809447
Actually the industry has been devoting huge amounts of time and money to producing displays which will deliver much better performance and cost than a technology that goes back to WWII.

>>809451
>Someone ought to tell the marketing guys at Sony
I don't work at Sony, but they don't have any CRTs left in production except a couple of professional models and even then, they face heavy competition from flat panels.

>>809448
>Last laugh is on us when their picture tubes die of old age and they can't buy a new one.
Good luck repairing an LCD panel.

My last television was a black+white Zenith from 1962. My current television is an FD Trinitron WEGA from 2004. I do not expect to ever buy an LCD, given that we'll likely have consumer OLED screens by ~2040.

>>809454
Well, give me a call when I can buy one for under $2,500. Right now, surplus CRT master monitors are under $100 and outperform all but the highest-end consumer flat panels.

>>809458
>Good luck repairing an LCD panel
Those don't have electron guns that will eventually poop out with enough hours of use put on them

>>809459
>they face heavy competition from flat panels.
They brag about how their OLED picture monitors have better performance than their Trinitron CRTs. "Pro" LCD is a nightmare that they want to forget.

>>809458
>given that we'll likely have consumer OLED screens by ~2040
I doubt it will take that long

>>809339

That would be pretty cool but it's physically impossible.

NTSC is line-based, not pixel-based.

>>809467
>"Pro" LCD is a nightmare that they want to forget
LCDs are best suited for static applications such as point of service terminals and PC apps (if you're staring at MS Word all day, you want something without eye strain and CRTs provide no advantage here)

That's why they're working on pro OLED as you said/

>>809375

It's not the phosphors on the TV that are taking that long to fade, it's the afterimage on your own retina.

>>809458
>given that we'll likely have consumer OLED screens by ~2040.
Someone could even pick up the SED patent, and manage to make them viable for the consumer market by then.

Doubtful, but there's always wishful thinking.

>>809470
Actually this is true of all analog signals

>>809470
NTSC works out to approximately 640x480

>>809483
Now, on color CRTs it's actually a little less because of blur (something like 512 pixels across). Black and white CRTs have no theoretical resolution limit.

>>809483

That's VGA...

>>809481
Right, which is one of the reasons analog TVs are better for retro games. There's no standard dot-clock for old consoles (common screen widths include at least 160, 256, 320, 384, 480, 512, and 640 pixels). You'd need a very high-resolution screen to accommodate them all without scaling artifacts.

300dpi OLED? Sure, I'll ditch the Trinitron.

>>809483
I'm British. What about us in PAL land? You'd need totally separate panels which do 640x576.

>>809483
That's about the effective resolution, but you're going to get aliasing/moire pattens if you display different console games on a fixed 640px-wide panel.

>>809491
Plain old System M with no motion (so full 480 visible lines) comes out to around there.

>>809489
>(common screen widths include at least 160, 256, 320, 384, 480, 512, and 640 pixels)

Depends. If you have a 640x480 panel, some of those resolutions are even multiples of it (inc. 160 and 320). They could simply be doubled up to fit the screen geometry.

>>809478

This.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_emission_display

They used to have SD LCD TVs 10 years ago. I don't know what the native resolution of them was. IIRC, something like 800x600.

>>809503
You run into problems with non-square pixels, though. Even calculating the "intended" aspect ratio is a pain in the ass - you don't exactly know how many lines/pixels are supposed to be overscanned. It's not as simple as "the whole active video area should be 4:3". You need to look at the ratio of active to total dot clocks per line (or active to total lines per field) and compare it to NTSC reference timings, and there's no guarantee it will come out the same across machines.

The NTSC color clock is something like 3.5Mhz and the luminance (pixel) clock is 14Mhz. Of course this only applies to broadcast signals and consoles/computers could and did freely manipulate it.

>>809512
Overscanning isn't really relevant because it was mostly done as a safeguard for the CRT aging and suffering some picture shrinkage.

>>809509

I have a 19" 4:3 LCD from the early 2000's that is 480p. It doesnt have any scaling issues but there is massive input lag and the contrast/black level is shit.

>>809509
This C64 >>80692 is running on one of those TVs. It seems to be at least 800x600 because there's enough room for the border area.

>>809496

System M is 525 with 483 visible, and still no actual pixel grid.

>>809521
Err yeah, it's using some really outdated panel tech

>>809509
I came across one of the early Samsung Tantus rear-projection LCD EDTVs the other day. It was advertised as "ultra-large, ultra-light". It was about 30" and about as heavy as a small tube TV. lolz

>>809521
>It doesnt have any scaling issues but there is massive input lag
I have a PC monitor from that period and the response time seems ok, but the color quality sucks.

>>809519
The ratio of total/active lines and pixels still makes a difference to how tall and wide the picture appears on a CRT, however. If you're being autistic about video games (as I assume we all are, being on /vr/), then it's a factor to consider in displaying at the proper aspect ratio.

>>809528
Too bad they dropped the things from production instead of continue producing them with more modern types of panels.

>>809534
I would think if the display is 4:3, aspect ratio is not an issue

>>809537
There's no point. You're still cramming an analog interlaced video signal onto a digital progressive screen. The proper solution here is a pixel matrix which is too fine to resolve with the human eye, so you can freely scale the picture without noticeable artifacts. At normal video game sizes (20", 24", etc) a 4k monitor should give you enough resolution headroom to do whatever you want.

>>809543
The visible display is 4:3, of course, but the issue is how to map the video signal onto that display. CRTs overscanned a bit, and the timing of the video signal would alter how wide or tall the full overscanned picture extended. It's typically safe to assume that the active video area was intended to be 4:3, but not foolproof.

>>809537

>>809387 here

4:3 LCD displays were dropped because of mainly the switch to HDTV. Of course that meant PC monitors were also going to go since they'd just have one big assembly line that the panels were produced on and simply slap different PCBs in them depending on the application.

In short, the main difference between 4:3 LCD TVs and PC monitors was the PCB

>>809545
One could also simply set 1x1 mapping, but then the picture would be smaller if it was lower resolution.

I've used NES games on my Sony HDTV and don't appear to have lost anything except some visual glitches that are not necessary to see anyway.

>>809545
>so you can freely scale the picture without noticeable artifacts

That isn't a problem though. 160 is an even multiple of 320 which is an even multiple of 640. Of course some stuff uses 256 or other odd resolutions.

>>809560
>some stuff
Like NES, most SNES, some Genesis, and some PSX games.

Also, what do you do about games that are 224 lines tall?

>>809563
>Also, what do you do about games that are 224 lines tall?

How about something like the Sinclair Spectrum (256x192)

>>809574
>>809560
IIRC, Spectrums just leave a blank border around the top and bottom of the screen

Actually LCD TVs do not have a problem with NTSC, provided it's standard broadcast NTSC. It's the nonstandard variants used by consoles/computer that can fuck shit up.

Obviously Sharp or Toshiba or whatever isn't going to bother programming their firmware so some neckbeard's Colecovision displays properly.

>>809581
CRTs were obviously designed for broadcast NTSC as well, but they're dumb analog electronics similar to a radio, thus will blindly eat whatever is fed into them.

>>809559
>don't appear to have lost anything except some visual glitches

And a few frames' worth of reaction time.

>>809614
Not him, but did you test this particular model or are you blindly predisposed to think HDTV=bad, radiation cannon=good

>>809620

See >>809448

>>809453
>Do wish I had that those lungs back though

Marijuana is a hell of a drug, isn't it?

>>>/420chan/

>>809620

Anything that processes/scales the image is going to introduce this type of lag. It's a property of that function.

The alternative would be to display an unprocessed image, which would end up being a postage stamp in the middle of an HD display.

>>809620
There's a very easy test for a given HDTV: Set up SF. If it's unplayable or barely playable, the TV is crap. If you can use the game fine without serious lag, you're good.

>>809631
>The alternative would be to display an unprocessed image, which would end up being a postage stamp in the middle of an HD display
that was already covered in >>806948

>>809637
I have a SNES and a SF2 cartridge, but it's not set up now. Will test it when I get the time.

>>809637
Punch Out is even better.

>>809639
Fuck, I wish it _were_ possible to have a postage stamp 640x480 picture on most HDTVs. Sadly, most don't let you do that.

>>809628

Most of it's from dust and vehicle soot when I worked in cross dock.

>>809637

The last fight in Punch Out on the NES requires reflexes near to the edge of what's physiologically possible. A few frames of lag will actually make that fight completely unwinnable.

Someone should make a list of SF2 tested with various HDTVs and figure out which ones work better than others.

>>809656
>Most of it's from dust and vehicle soot when I worked in cross dock
That would imply anyone on 4chan has a job or has left their mom's basement in the last three years
>The last fight in Punch Out on the NES requires reflexes near to the edge of what's physiologically possible
I've heard this being mentioned as a problem on the Wii VC, but it could be worked around by using component cables.

>>809661
Wasn't done with SF2, but here you go:
http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/

>>809672
>Over a whole frame of lag
>Excellent

>>809681
Really, how much difference does one frame make? If it was like 4-5 frames, I'd be worried.

>>809690
>>809681
it's as good as we're going to get until affordable OLEDs exist

>>809681
http://www.displaylag.com/the-lag-tester-a-new-standard/

>>809691
And when that day comes, you will be able to play PO with no problems?

>>809693

>>809387 here

To quote Joe Namath, I guarantee it

>>809671
>I've heard this being mentioned as a problem on the Wii VC, but it could be worked around by using component cables.

The cables wouldn't make a difference unless they cause the game to output the signal at your TV's native resolution so it doesn't have to be processed by the scaler.

A simpler solution would have been to just alter the game slightly for that release to give the player a bit more time to react after a visual cue.

>>809681
>>809690
>>809691

1 frame is excellent for a modern TV.

Strange though that the testing method states that they're pushing a 1080p signal, yet the displays that don't have to scale the image still don't have latency down to the speed of display response.

>>809692
Ah, alright. Good to know they're not buffering the whole frame when you send a native signal.

>>809703
>The cables wouldn't make a difference unless they cause the game to output the signal at your TV's native resolution so it doesn't have to be processed by the scaler

that's exactly what was going on. Playing PO with a composite cable created delays due to deinterlacing the 480i signal. By using component, you had 480p and thus no lag from this.

I'm 31 now and first played PO in 1990 when I was 10. It's not _too_ hard to beat now, especially once you've memorized all of Mike's patterns and know exactly what he's going do, but as a kid...holy fucking crap did I want to throw the NES controller at the TV.

>>809721
>I'm 31 now and first played PO in 1990
Are you a wizard?

>>809724
No but I never had any interest in the whole marrying/kids thing. Why do you think I'm on 4chan?

>>809726
I'm also 31 and I'd like to say a huge "Fuck you" for feeding into the stereotype that all us oldfags are autists or wizards or some kind of psychopaths.

Screw this, I'm going to 420chan.

>>809729
There's no need to be a butthole. Do I have to be tripping over kids' toys to prove how much of a normalfag I am?

>>809729
I'm 30, and I don't believe you.

>>809731
Lemme explain carefully so you get it, moron

>there are underage /v/ trolls on this board
>they argue that all oldfags like us are wizards or psychopaths or pedophiles
>therefore by admitting you're a basement dweller with no wife/gf or kids, you feed into this stereotype

>>809736
>I'm 30, and I don't believe you
Don't believe what? I don't follow you.

>>809737
The family life really didn't appeal to me. Apparently I have to do that because of some lowlife underage trolls?

>>809729
>Screw this, I'm going to 420chan
Don't let the door hit you on the way out

>>809740
Well...do you have a job and aren't a basement dweller?

>>809745
Yes I work a damn full-time job

>>809703
>Strange though that the testing method states that they're pushing a 1080p signal, yet the displays that don't have to scale the image still don't have latency down to the speed of display response.
Read the article about how they're measuring the latency. They're looking at time until the bottom line of the display is shown. I'm assuming then that the displays are responding in a matter of 3-4ms relative to when they're getting the video information.

>>809739
I don't believe a grown-ass man over the age of 19 would willingly browse 420chan

>>809721
To be fair, most games are in large part memorizing how the AI works. Once you get that down pat, even difficult stuff like Punch-Out aren't a major challenge.

>>809726
That's fine. Nobody on 4chan should be allowed within 50 feet of children anyway.

>>809761
I'm not a pedo, nor do I find children gross or dirty, I just never thought I would have the patience or maturity to be a father.

Returning to the _original_ subject, LCDs by nature were never going to work for anything but applications where a static picture was used. Not just games, but even watching TV/movies. They physically cannot achieve the fluidity of CRT, plasma, or OLED.

I love CRTs, I think getting rid of them was a mistake, and I would gladly buy a new one if I still could. That said, I'm genuinely concerned about the idea of using non-replaceable picture tubes that have a finite lifespan. Once they're all dead, what will we do then?

>>809764
>I just never thought I would have the patience or maturity to be a father
Again, way to feed into the stereotype of 4chan users being neckbeard autists

>>809779
For allegedly being 31, you seem like the immature autist here, not him. He wasn't the guy who feels the need to sage and flame like a /v/eenager every goddamn post.

>>809776
Technology will hopefully mature by then, and they will no longer be required to achieve the picture quality/laglessness we're after.

Or you may see some small, cottage/niche industry pop up to make new tubes.

The former is considerable more likely.

>>809786
Like I said in >>809696, we're working on OLED tech now and when it's fully matured, I can promise you as good or better motion than a CRT.

>Or you may see some small, cottage/niche industry pop up to make new tubes.
>The former is considerable more likely

Likely so. It takes huge, heavy, and expensive equipment to manufacture CRTs in addition to having to pay people to operate that equipment.

>>809407
>Also you know most CRTs really didn't make that good picture quality
Cheap LCDs have many issues; so did cheap CRTs. The problems are different, but they're seriously limiting in both cases.

Cheap CRTs didn't have the same dynamic range, and tended to be less linear from black to white. They also tended to have a much shorter lifespan than LCDs, and their colors drift more than LCDs.

Cheap LCDs today use TN film panels, which have a limited color gamut (6-bits/channel for the panel, faking 8-bits via dithering), and other issues.

I can swear on a stack of Bibles that I've never found one LCD monitor that had better picture quality than the old AOC 14" from 1994 that I used to have on my 486. Not a single one.

>>809824
Well...if you used a professional IPS display, but they're really slow and only useful for photo editing.

>>809795
>Like I said in >>809696, we're working on OLED tech now and when it's fully matured, I can promise you as good or better motion than a CRT

I would hope so. Some of the complaints in here about black frame insertion sound like bunk anyway or at least nitpicking.

>>809795
>It takes huge, heavy, and expensive equipment to manufacture CRTs

>>809973
We don't work in the industry like that guy, so I would take his word for it

>>809976
he's probably not in the thread anymore. it was active a couple hours ago.

I swear, these threads always bring out the worst in /vr/

>>809976
Not him, but I used to work in marketing for a related company. In a lot of cases, you have to factor in the psychological element. Even if a given CRT performs better, offices that don't have the latest flat panel displays are seen as outdated.

So did anyone ever get around to modding their TV for RGB input?

>>809973
If the complex near me that Sony used is any sign, it does.

>>809990
I wish we could just go back to posting nice pictures of the damn things.

>>810000
They are probably all dead now.

>>810001
Making large CRTs in large quantities in automated factories requires lots of machinery. They're not that complicated to make individually by hand (hell, people have been doing it for a century).

>>810004
A nice bit of the work was still done by hand at the plant.

And the machinery need to make sizable tubes alone would take up a nice bit of space.

>>810004
CRT's are still produced for Indian, asian and east european countries. Philips and LG are 2 companies that i know of.

>>810006
>A nice bit twice
I need sleep.

>>810005
That was covered a while back in the thread. Yes they do still make some new CRT TVs for Third World countries, but they're junk and nowhere close to the quality of high end models in the past.

>>810005
Sony has I believe one active Trinitron plant left in Indonesia

>>810006
It does. You need large machines to blow the glass for the tubes and also to move them around because they're heavy as fuck. Also a good bit of hand wiring and adjustment is needed.

In fact since the event of LCD TVs, the number of display manufacturers has doubled because of how much cheaper and easier it is to produce them. Profit margins are shrinking due to the increased competition.

>>810005

www.lg.com/in/color-tv

>dat slim LG

>>810019
That proves how it was definitely possible to make slimmer, lighter CRTs, but they didn't want to spend too much effort on it because of chasing the easy-profit LCD bandwagon.

>>810015
I heard that, but I believe it's used to produce PVMs for the professional market (not consumer TVs). These things cost several thousand bucks which is how they can afford to keep the factory running.

Because as someone else pointed out in here, LCD studio monitors proved to be a horrible mistake. It will likely take the event of affordable OLEDs before PVMs and their ilk can finally be put to rest for good.

>>810025
LCDs have legit uses such as anything with static pictures because they're likely to cause screen burn on a CRT. Where they can't cut it is gaming or video editing or anything with fast motion.

I have an old 17" Dell CRT monitor. All I have to do is look at some animated banners on websites and note how much more fluid they look compared to any LCD display.

Until we get affordable OLEDs, there will never be any flat panel that outperforms an FW900.

Fuck, even some crap B&W portable TV from the 70s can handle Street Fighter just fine while your expensive Aquos chokes on cock.

>>810069
>Fuck, even some crap B&W portable TV from the 70s
you mean like in OP pic?

>>810072
Right. even some junk set like that with tuner dials and rainbows everywhere due to shit convergence can play any console game made up to the 6th gen without a hitch.

it's a total embarrassment that display manufacturers are spending $$$ trying to outperform the TV in OP's pic

>>810076
not just games but sports and anything else with fast motion

>>>/g/34638615

Cripes, the marketers are in /g/ too

>>810129
Willing to bet OP is >>810060

God I'm so fucking sick of hearing about fucking scanlines

>mur scanlines

Fuck you. A 4:3 LCD TV produces superior picture. I have a 2000's model 20 inch Sharp that I'd take over a PVM in a heart beat were it not for the lack of RGB inputs (the best it can muster is a close-to-RGB YUV input which is damn close to RGB).

Yes. I would take this thing over a PVM were it not for the lack of RGB inputs. And I got it free from a client who's PC I fix. I love this thing. Even on s-video, it rocks my fucking socks when playing Perfect Dark.

>b-but thats how the games were dev....

Shut. The fuck. Up. Shut up. Scanlines are image distortion caused by old monitor technology. DUMP THOSE THINGS FOR SERIOUS PLAY. GET WITH THE TIMES.

>>810147
Scanlines are irrelevant, it's the utter inability of LCDs to produce fluid motion that is problematic.

/g/ here

Srsly fuck you stupid /vr/ trolls for raiding our board. Go and masturbate to your 300 pound radiation cannons.

You have 30 seconds to identify a CRT that has

A) A higher refresh rate at a higher resolution
B) A higher pixel density
C) Superior linearity and geometry
D) Superior Delta E
E) Superior Contrast in the presence of 2 FC


You can't.

Another point on "it was developed on X"

I have a modest PC Engine collection. I like to read through the manuals to see the screengrabs they chose, because I noticed they were as low-rent as possible. Lemme describe to you how PC Engine games were developed:

On special hardware, yes, but when they made the manuals they took actual fucking film photographs of the screen, then usually converted everything to Black And White to save on printing costs. These zip kids wern't going to read the manuals. I fucking swear to you the conditions under which many great PCE/Tg-16 games were made were ghetto. They make 2007 camcorder LPers look advanced.

They use RF to make these games, on off-the-shelf TVs that fit on a desk because thats easier. Like for instance with the SFC game "The Violinist Of Hamelin", in the intro the sky has this gradient effect between the color changes in the sky. Well on RF it does this neat color blending thing making it look natural, but when I pipe it in through s-video the gradient effect is gone because chroma and luma aren't mixed, suddenly everythings a lot clearer. Did ya hear that? The devs were counting on people using RF.

But please, by all means, if you're going to be super Adam Lanza (what a game that would be for the SNES, eh?) about "seeing it the way it was developed", track down one of the former devs and ask them what they used.

Me? I'll take RGB through a "shitty" LCD panel any day over a CRT. If I can get it a LCD panel to do RGB in, watch me smash up that PVM tube with a god damned sledge hammer.

>>810159
Actually that was covered in >>810076 and >>810069

Even the worst CRTs will still not suffer the crippling lag of LCD/plasma, nor do they have fixed native resolution.

>>810162

I will conceed the point on motion and lag. However, in terms of clarity, panels win. They just need to get better refresh rates. I can live with the lag to see all the detail and hyper-crisp, defined individual pixels.

>>810163
It's like I said in the /g/ thread. LCD is fine _if_ you're doing predominately static screen applications. If you're doing gaming or watching sports or video editing, they're not gonna cut it.

>>810164
As I said in the /g/ thread, it depends on the rate of change per frame.

>>810069
Not only is the FW900 pretty terrible for everything except MUH WIDE SCREEN and crt motion, it's not even the best GDM or third party trinitron screen.

In the presence of one candle at one foot (i know, I know), the contrast drops by nearly half on the FW900.

>Street fighter
Considering the way that particular game works (basic static background with moving sprites), there's absolutely no reason to use a CRT for it other than being retarded

>>810167
OLED of course would work fine as that's what modern fighter tournaments use.

>>810169
>OLED of course would work fine
Except for things like displaying colours accurately, not being an example of manufactured obsolescence, keeping up with LCD, maintaining white points etc.

>>809467

/thread

>>810172
Oh look, that limey bum from the /g/ thread followed me here

Someone needs to start an Amiga thread here; they're good containment areas for Yuropoors.

>>810174
I'm waiting
>>810157

I have full spec of the FW900 if you want to see them.

It's a shit screen compared to even old LCDs

>>810175
>compared to old LCDs
Do ho ho ho! I have on my desk an LG Flatron from 2004.

It's shit.

>>810176
I have three T221s here from 2005 and 2006 (x2). They perform better than the FW900 in everything with the exception of motion, as to be expected and produces almost exactly the same number of colours as an FW900.

And the T221 is of course not even a high end monitor by todays standards in terms of colour reproduction.

If the marketers think LCDs are better, plug an NES and Punch-Out into your new Sharp 32". Try and beat Mike Tyson. You can't do it.

>>809327
75Hz is better than 60Hz only for 75fps games. The refresh rate has to match the frame rate for good motion quality. Console games are capped at 60fps.

>>809490
Why are you even in this thread if you play PAL games? PAL is for casuals.

>>809769
See >>807889 . This setup actually has higher motion quality than a CRT. Only problem is it doesn't work with original console hardware.

>>809958
Black frame insertion on OLED is a dumb idea. If you have OLEDs strong enough to do black frame insertion you have OLEDs that can simulate a CRT raster, which is a much better idea because of lower latency.

>>809776
Inorganic LED displays exist (those huge wall displays). Theres no technical reason they couldn't be made the size of a large TV, and inorganic LEDs are easily tough enough to simulate a CRT raster without burning out.

>>810292
>75Hz is better than 60Hz only for 75fps games. The refresh rate has to match the frame rate for good motion quality. Console games are capped at 60fps

That's not true. In Europe they're 50 fps.

>>810292
>75Hz is better than 60Hz only for 75fps games. The refresh rate has to match the frame rate for good motion quality

As an expert on retro PC games, I know for a fact that stuff designed for CGA/EGA does not work correctly with VGA because they're intended to run at 60Hz and not the latter's 70Hz. Alley Cat, Sierra games, and many others have been confirmed to have ragged animation on VGA.

>>810292
>Only problem is it doesn't work with original console hardware
Which consoles does it not work with

>>810292
>Why are you even in this thread if you play PAL games? PAL is for casuals
Hurr durr Yuropoors n their gay-ass Amigaz n shit hurr durr semen hurr Mudslimes

Fuck off, troll

>>810302
Yes, but as I said, PAL is for casuals.

>>810307
The whole concept relies on emulators running at double speed so that adding a black frame between each emulated frame gives the correct speed. The only possible way you could do it with real hardware would be if you could overclock everything to double speed (including the video output, which usually has its own crystal) and if all the dynamic memory could survive the black frame time with the clock stopped. This seems unlikely to me.

>>810316
What does black frame insertion have to do with anything and why is it necessary

>>810315
I'm European myself. I imported all console games back when 60Hz option wasn't standard. 50Hz is completely unacceptable.

And I don't hate the Amiga. It's the origin of some awesome music, and the origin of some games that became good when ported to better platforms.

>>810318
The scanline autists think you have to insert a black frame to simulate CRT flicker. It's purely a visual artifact that adds nothing to the actual performance of a game.

>>810327
Okay...I see

>>810336
You see, I have had scanline autists tell me that scanlines actually improve the quality of the picture.

Imagine you were, for example, doing photo editing on your PC. Do you want lines carving up the image? Of course not.

>>810318
See:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/windows/hardware/gg463407.aspx
http://www.blurbusters.com/

LCD pixels are on all the time, and suddenly change at the end of the frame. This is a highly unnatural type of motion unlike anything in nature. It's equivalent to an object moving by repeated rapid teleportation. The human brain can only resolve it as blurry motion. This is an intrinsic flaw in all non-flickering displays. It's extremely obvious in a side by side comparison (with framerate of the test motion matching the refresh rate of the display).

Black frame insertion is an ugly hack that solves the problem at the cost of adding latency because a whole frame has to be buffered. Emulating at double speed reduces latency to compensate.

The ideal solution would be increasing the framerate high enough (eg. 300fps) that the sample-and-hold blur becomes unnoticeable. This isn't an option for most /vr/ games. The second best solution would be an OLED display bright enough that you could turn on a single line at a time without destroying it. That might be physically impossible.

>>810327
Scanlines are an ugly and useless artifact of the way progressive scan was displayed on unsuitable displays. Flicker is literally the only way to get good motion quality from low framerate content (60fps being "low framerate" in this context). This is an unchangeable fact of human biology.

Get a 60Hz LCD and a 60Hz CRT. Get a 3rd or 4th gen. game where the scrolling is a constant number of pixels per frame (eg. most shmups). Set them up side by side, look at the scrolling. You'd have to be blind to miss the huge difference in quality.

People talking shit about flicker have never done this side by side comparison.

>>810349
Actually it was very common to set Windows desktops to >60Hz because the flicker occurred too fast to be discernible. The reason being that...well anyone who's stared at 60Hz for an hour will know why.

>>810353
Obviously the LCD won't be as smooth because it physically cannot turn the pixels off as fast as a CRT. This is why Duck Hunt can't work on LCDs.

>>810362
In fact I can attest to this because if you set a CRT monitor to 75Hz, there's no difference vs 60Hz except for the absence of flicker.

If you set it to 85Hz, there is some blur but that's really not needed since the human eye cannot perceive flicker over 70Hz anyway.

>>810359
Windows isn't running at a fixed 60fps or 70fps so it doesn't matter. This only matters when framerate = refresh rate.

>>810362
Even if it switched the pixels literally instantly there would still be blur. The blur is in the human visual system, not the hardware. It's nothing to do with the Duck Hunt problem.

>>810365
You're not displaying fixed framerate content so it's irrelevant. And the human eye absolutely can perceive extremely fast flicker when the eye moves. Saccadic masking doesn't work for high frequency content. In my personal testing with an LED + 555 timer I can see flicker up to about 10KHz.

>>810374
In fact even at 60Hz CRT flicker is often not noticeable unless you have lots of bright, solid color. So I call bunk on this guy's claims

>>810374
>Windows isn't running at a fixed 60fps or 70fps so it doesn't matter
Not but it is used to play games which have to operate at a certain frame rate.

>>>/hr/1848558

CRTs lose big-time in the sharpness department. You can see the individual pores on the bitch's skin here, but a CRT would be too fuzzy to discern this fine detail.

>>810379
60Hz flicker is always visible, but how annoying it is depends on the size of the display, how close you are, the room lighting, what's on the display, and how hard you are concentrating (more intense mental focus = less annoying flicker).

You're correct that large areas of bright color are highly annoying, and that's why Windows (dark on light color scheme) looks much worse than console games (light on dark color scheme) at 60Hz.

>>810380
Back in the days of Windows on 60Hz/70Hz CRTs, barely any DOS/Windows games ran at a fixed framerate. Jazz Jackrabbit is one notable exception, and that had an option to switch between 60fps and 70fps.

>>810381
I did a comparison on my LCD monitor and a CRT. For this case, the LCD was clearly sharper and had warmer colors.

That said, my CRT is an ordinary consumer-level shadow mask PC monitor and not a professional-grade one that would have been used for image editing. Maybe not a fair comparison?

>>810409
LCDs have long since had superior image quality than CRTs. It's not relevant to /vr/, because old games have poor image quality no matter what display you lose. The important thing is motion quality.

Ideal game for demonstrating the advantages of CRT or other flickering display: Uniracers. This looks like shit on an LCD.

>>810413
>LCDs have long since had superior image quality than CRTs
...for static images
>It's not relevant to /vr/, because old games have poor image quality no matter what display you lose
Wrong. It's also relevant to modern gaming and video editing and basically anything else where motion is important.

>>810417
That's what "image quality" means. Image quality = static image quality. Motion quality = moving image quality.

>>810417
Consider that CRTs were originally designed for the express purpose of displaying moving images in the form of TV. It is natural that this would be where their strength lies. LCDs were designed originally for watches, clocks, and other static things.

>>810427
It's pure fluke that CRTs are good at motion. Remember, television is made by people who have an inferiority complex over *low* framerates. Seriously, these people think 24fps is a good thing.

>>810435
They went with 60Hz largely because of the limitations of vacuum tube electronics.

>>810418
Static Image and Motion Image are both Images so both are defined by Image Quality.
Jackass

>>810492
"Motion quality" and "Image quality" are technical jargon. They don't have the plain English meanings of the words.

Is there any consensus on the best desk LED / OLED monitor to couple with a scaler / slg generator for retro gaming?

>>810572
Just emulator, you'll get better results.

>>810159
Another point on "it was developed on X"

I have a modest Nintendo Power collection. I like to read through the articlesto see the screengrabs they chose, because I noticed they were as high-rent as possible. Lemme describe to you how Nintendo games were developed:

On special hardware, yes, but when they made the manuals they took actual fucking color film photographs of the screen, using an RGB-modded Nintendo. These American kids wern't going to notice the enhanced colors. I fucking swear to you the conditions under which many great Nintendo games were made were advanced. They make 2007 camcorder LPers look ghetto.

They use RGB to make these games, on broadcast monitors that fit on a desk because thats easier.

Me? I'll take RGB through a broadcast monitor any day. If I was an RF-enthusiast or an LCD freak I'd put hammers in my ass all the time.

>>810572
Not if you almost exclusively collect & play saturn...

>>810601
They probably took the screen shots right off the development computers, which I believe were some kind of Sharps.

>>810601
RGB through a broadcast monitor is bullshit because those games, regardless of what they were developed on, were designed for the end user to play them on a typical average consumer TV.

>>810636
That's like saying Kanye West's new album was designed for people to listen to with earbuds

>>810636
Not so much for the NES, but for most other systems, if you were in europe, you had pretty easy access to RGB from average consumer TVs.

>>810642
Modern music actually is designed for people to listen with shitty equipment in noisy environments. That's part of the reason they killed the dynamic range.

>>810642
I was amazed at how great the music in Pokemon RBY/GSC sounds when you connect a good pair of external speakers to the Gameboy. The tinny little internal speaker doesn't do it justice.

What we need for a modern display solution is an OLED where we write our own custom firmware

>>810657
I've heard that the Beach Boys used to have their music mixed through a shitty car speaker, too. In any case, just because something is designed for inferior equipment doesn't mean that your experience can't be substantially improved with better equipment.

>>810946
Actually the correct analogy would be listening to BBs songs on professional studio equipment of the 1960s which wasn't available to the average consumer.

In the 90s, one could go into Circuit City and buy a Trinitron with S-video and all that jazz, or they could buy some Chinese shit with RF only. But you couldn't get a PVM in a retail store, nor was it affordable to the consumer.

>>810960
IIRC, weren't most studio CRTs only made in sub-19" sizes?

>>810965
There were large models, but they weren't as common and the quality isn't as good as the smaller models.

Hell, Samsung put out a 40in studio monitor at one point.

>>810965
They made PVMs up to 40 inches, but those models were very rare due to their massive bulk and price tag.

>>810971
>There were large models, but they weren't as common and the quality isn't as good as the smaller models

I once saw a Sharp (?) 36" TV running. It was one enormous motherfucker. The scanlines were about as thick as my thumb. So to people who argue that CRTs aren't resolution limited like LCDs, that's not quite true. Displaying really low resolutions like NTSC at that screen size is going to look like shit.

Read an article once in a PC magazine where they worked out that 19" is the optimal size for 1024x768 and 14" is optimal for 640x480. The former is too blurry on smaller CRTs and the latter is too coarse on bigger ones.

>>810993
CRT TVs maxed out at 40" due to weight and the physical limitations of glass blowing. PC monitors I think ran up to 22".

>>810993
That's not quite true; it more depends on the shadow mask. I've seen 14" monitors that looked great at 1024x768 and others that were a fuzz-fest at 640x480.

The marketer now creates these threads just so he can spam "radiation cannon" and "muh scalines" before ultimately slipping in his recommendation for an XRGB scaler.

>>811038
>>>/x/

>>810960
>Actually the correct analogy would be listening to BBs songs on professional studio equipment of the 1960s which wasn't available to the average consumer.
Well, if vintage studio equipment was still the best device for listening to the Beach Boys, and if you could obtain such equipment for a fraction of the cost of even a low-end modern consumer-grade stereo, why wouldn't you? Because that's basically the situation we have with PVMs and old game consoles today.

As someone who's worked in the industry, I will tell you that CRTs can produce excellent picture quality, but it's much harder and more expensive to pull it off. Since they're analog electronics, a great deal of adjustment is needed which one does not have on a flat panel.

>>811106

So CRTs are for enthusiasts, and LCDs are for casuals. Got it.

>>811106
>>811115
Excellent image quality is difficult on a CRT, but excellent motion quality is automatic. Even the cheapest CRT has better image quality than an LCD.

>>806790
>plasmas having color and response-time problems

nigga get your facts straight, plasma is CRT-tier.

what you mean is LCD and LCD only.

go try out a fucking plasma you mongoloid

>>811115
Not exactly. LCDs are preferable for many applications, especially ones like point-of-service terminals or other utility uses. Response time is irrelevant here since you're mostly displaying static images and in any case, CRTs will get burn-in being used this way. Also average computer tasks like surfing the Web and using MS Office benefit little from a CRT.

When it comes to motion-oriented tasks, LCDs fall much behind CRT, plasma, or OLED.

>>811132
Plasma is better than LCDs, but still has problems. The response time is roughly between that of CRT and LCD (so there is still some lag) and because the pixels are digital devices that can only be "off" or "on", it's poor at color gradients. Also color plasma panels have Xbox-hueg pixels and so cannot be made in sizes under 32".

>>811151
>Also average computer tasks like surfing the Web and using MS Office benefit little from a CRT
In fact a CRT may be worse for doing the company payroll since you'll get horrible eyestrain.

>>811132
I like you.

>>811156
I have never tested retro games on plasma, but I imagine you still could not win Punch-Out.

>>811193
Dunno; there will definitely be some lag, though plasma might give you a 2 frame discrepancy while LCD is like 4-5.

I would say that based on my observation of plasma in action in store displays, it definitely does handle sports broadcasts better.

>CRTs have supposedly better motion
>1/3 of the screen is illuminated at an given time
>the motion enhancement is purely an optical illusion

Nope, you can still trash those CRTs they aren't worth a damn.

>>811207
You still exciting phosphors like in a CRT

>>811591
The motion itself is an optical illusion on all displays. CRT-style illusion better matches human biology.

>>810169
No they don't

Is this a /vr/ meme now?

>>811676
Not really because higher refresh rates hide flicker. This only matters as far as 60hz is concerned

>>811196
if you were running plasma at native resolution (not scaled), it might be ok

>>806776
I have one just like that

Lemme explain specifically what the deal with flicker is. Essentially, it creates a natural "pause" for the human brain to finish processing the last frame before the next one is displayed. It's like watching a film.

Allow me to explain what the deal with flicker is. Essentially, it creates a natural "pause" for the human brain to finish processing the last frame before the next one is displayed. It's like watching a film

/g/ here. Eat shit and die. I know it was you guys who made another troll thread on our board.

>>811156
are you fucking stupid? the response time of plasma is CRT-tier. some models have phosphor lag but these are the crappy cheap samsung ones.

plasmas do however have a bit of input lag compared to CRTs but it's mostly inconsequential for single-player games, as long as the image is fluid and the motion is clean.

>>806948
Oh man dem blacks look great on my ips.

>>813583
>>811156

oh and plasma is actually really good at color and color gradients, the only color-related problem is some pwm noise and it's minor

>>806952
>never heard of the fw900

>shitflinging in /g/ thread goes away
>start having some good discussion
>404'd

>>813587
I have a really old 42" plasma that has a native resolution of just 720p but I can attest that 7th gen games look out of control good on it and that it does get weird noise inside intense reds.

I got it for $10 at Goodwill because its composite scaler is heinously fucked up and apparently its HDMI input doesn't work either but its YPbPr input is literally stunning and even my most hardcore gaming friends praise it. It's great for Netflix, too.

>>813376
The flicker is always visible when you move your eyes, and it's beneficial even at refresh rates where it's invisible to static eyes.

>>813525
False. The flicker is required so that the visual information is shown at the correct time. If you set the framerate high enough (several hundreds fps) it becomes unnecessary because the temporal error becomes very small. In this case a sample-and-hold display is superior. That overclocked 4K LCD on BlurBusters might actually be fast enough for this at 720p. But it's irrelevant to most /vr/ games because you can't increase their framerate.

>>813583
Plasma is sample-and-hold like LCDs.

>>813980
>I got it for $10 at Goodwill because its composite scaler is heinously fucked up

It's actually broken, or it works but looks terrible?

>>813980
If it's an older plasma, beware of burn-in. It's not a problem on recent models, but anything that predates 1080p look out.

>>814090
It works sort of but I'm sure not the way it's supposed to. Like, it would be completely unacceptable to anyone even idiots. Static everywhere, terrible color. Sometimes it even makes a very scary hissing noise from the mainboard. Needless to say I haven't had it in a composite mode in a while.

>>814095
Yeah, it will "burn in" at the drop of a hat. Even ten minutes of a white-on-black image leaves remnants but it goes away pretty quickly too. It's a very interesting screen to use, with very apparent strengths and weaknesses.

>>814374
I don't think there's been enough testing of plasma TVs with retro games to determine how well they work. In theory at least, it should be at least somewhat better than LCDs.

>>814448
I have a pvm for retro games although the plasma looks pretty bitchin' with Dreamcast too. I would post pics of that but I heard Dreamcast wasn't /vr/.

I wonder how well it would do with one of those scart to Y-U-V transcoders.

>>814456
That's not a fair comparison because DC is 480p

>>814518
Was I comparing something to something else? I had no idea!

A trinitron KV-SW29M31 is going for $20 near me; probably going for it.

Anything I can get from the model number?
This is in Australia.
I can't find much online, but I know it's oceanic.

Question from a clueless lurker: is there any chance that in the future television manufacturers will include CRT emulators programed into their TV's?

Im not sure if this type of thing is really in demand, but it would be neat if my TV came pre-packaged with a CRT mode which I could switch on and off whenever.

>>808360
Who the fuck is talking about sample and hold displays? I just want muh scanlines because Capcom vs SNK 2 looks like utter shit without them.

>>815629
Sample-and-hold displays unavoidably look like shit for the majority of /vr/ games.

Scanlines are a pointless gimmick that do nothing to improve image quality, as proved by VGA DOS games not having them.

>>815529
You can get the service manual here for free
http://elektrotanya.com/sony_bx1l-kv-sw29m31k_kv-sw29m50_kv-sw29m60k_kv-sw29m90k_kv-sw29m91.pdf/download.html
The download link is small text under the preview that says "you can get this manual for free here". I can see that it has three composite ins and a YUV aka YPbPr aka "component" input so it's as good as any consumer CRT tv you'd get here in the US. No SCART but as I understand it, that usually means you're going to end up with a PAL set and that would give you grief when using the composites or Svideo.

>>809407
>needs extensive adjusting to produce a good picture,

This is why you should burn in hell, all consumer tv's need this.

They're isn't any magic, I'm not gonna shell out 2500 for the best panel of 2013 just to use it stock settings, ass munch.

>>810179
Now now ambien, you don't know what you're talking about.

Now tell me how much those things cost again?

In 2002?

Oh isn't modern thinking great? You can now "overclock them" just like for cheap you can get great quality crt's.

Why do you come here to argue about crts? No one cares about how square the pixels are or why the color purple isn't a color.

>No SCART but as I understand it, that usually means you're going to end up with a PAL set and that would give you grief when using the composites or Svideo.

Murricans don't know about muh multi-standard televisions.
I can go buy almost any random old TV here and it'll do PAL, NTSC, S-Video and RGB-Scart at 60 as well as 50 hz.

Euro TVs are master race.

>>816686

Forgot to quote
>>815679

>>816686
The guy I was talking to is from Australia buying an Oceania type Tron.

>>815359
480p isn't a problem with HDTVs so much as 480i. Unfortunately, the composite inputs on the plasma TV are fucked up so you can't really test them.

>>815637
>Sample-and-hold displays unavoidably look like shit for the majority of /vr/ games

Exaggeration.

>>816763
Which are just Euro TV's with component instead of SCART.

My TV accepts all forms of NTSC as well as pal and SECAM.

>>816973

SECAM eh? Oh lol those French

Oh wait, they made SCART too.
The French are awesome.

>>816973
Do you want a cookie or something?

>>815637
>as proved by VGA DOS games not having them.

They had them, they were just smaller.

>implying CRT scanlines don't make the image crisper

>>816196
That's what you think you because you're used to it, dumbass

PAL and digital signals need no adjusting, you're too used to the shitty NTSC standard constantly needing to be adjusted for color, saturation, etc.

>>807136
PVM guy here...
I'm getting sick of shitting geometry issues with crts. Probably gonna go LCD + SLG combo. lel

>>817579
They don't

bump

>>813980
>native resolution of just 720p
So, 1366x768?

>>808335
About how much did you pay for it? I've got a neighborhood garage sale coming up and I'm looking to get rid of two CRTs. Both are ~20'', one has only coax input, appears to have mono sound, and I have the remote; the other has the Yellow White and Red ports (name escapes me at the moment) as well as coax, has a headphone jack, and appears to have stereo sound, but I don't have the remote for this one.

I'm thinking to price the coax only at $15 and price the one with more inputs at $20, and accept as low as $10 for them. Thoughts?

>>820614
Yeah that's what I end up running my desktop in but I still get semi-pixels that are hard on my eyes. It may be even lower.

>>820702
I wouldn't pay that for them in a million years.

Hey /vr/ Am I doin' it right?

Yuropoor here.

>>820747
scanlines are not huge and visable from 3 feet away
nope, not authentic enough, throw the tv away

I was just wondering...

I wonder if Arino has trouble with his games because of possible response time issues?

Maybe he's not bad at shooting/platform games at all -- maybe he's just playing them with more lag than ought to be played on his show, and blames himself for it.

Thoughts?

>>820776
Yeah it has nothing to do with the fact he's running composite into what is clearly a 16:9 hd crt.

>>820747
Shouldn't you be able to find an sd crt with scart for like $2 in youroop?

>>820793
and maybe /vr/ is just falling for an inaccurate myth
oh the mystery

>>820808
it was a joke, if you actually do take the whole huge scanlines shit seriously you should just go away

>>820821
So were you being sarcastic or facetious? There's a difference you know. It's not just all "edginess"

>>820793

You serious? I have an HDTV that is laggy as fuck and I have no problem playing any games.

Unless you play fighting games, rhythm games, or I guess shmups (though I don't know much about them), lag isn't a factor at all.

>>820964

And when I say shmups, I mean the people who actually take it seriously. As in they have a stick and care about 1ccing

>>820964
>>820970
>what is punch out

>>820816
What inaccurate myth is that?

CRT threads are to /vr/ what Linux threads are to /g/.

You retro television faggots are the dredges of this board and hipsters in your own sad right.

>i got this CRT you guys do i belong yet? huh?

Drown yourselves.

>>820714
How much they worth then? I'm seeing assholes on craigslist selling shitty CRTs for like $20.

I'm seriously trying to figure out a decent price.

>>821206
You see them listing them at $20 anyway. You should price them at $10 and take anything you can get.

>>821142
Don't be ridiculous, we generally keep our crt discussion in this one thread (and sometimes in arcade threads) and we answer people's questions. Anyone who wants one can get an acceptable crt for under $20 any day of the week (at least where I live)

>>820982
Punch Out goes under fighting games

Does anyone know where i can buy a blue gelatin filter so i can correctly adjust the color on my TV?

It looks like kodak were the only ones who made them and they have since been discontinued

Using emulators on a soft-modded Wii hooked up with component cables works pretty well, I've found. All the major ones can display games in their original resolution, except for GBA.

>>823426
No it doesn't

>>823735
>>823720
That's a shadow mask TV. Shadow mask (Which seperates every bit of the TV into individual lights) is totally different from an aperture grille (Which displays every bit of TV in solid vertical lines)

You won't find scanlines on shadow mask televisions. You have to have one of the high-end Sony TVs like the trinitron or the professional monitors like the PVMs.

Hey, I just a Trinitron PVM-1380. What kind of adapters do I need to hookup all my game systems to it?

>>823896
Bump. Can someone help?

>>823896

You'll probably need a BNC to RCA adapter. Get them off eBay and save yourself some money, they're stupidly expensive at stores.

>>823851
That's not entirely true. The scanlines are just less noticeable because the electrons bleed a bit. Those pics do make me more painfully aware that the wii is just giving me fake scanlines even on my pvm and motivates me to get my adapters built.

>>823896
Looks like that's just a vomposite monitor, Bro. Might look a little nicer than a consumer tron but not by much.

>>823929
Found one on Amazon for $4 which is fine. What about audio? Do I need anything special, or do these even have speakers?

>>823939
Doesn't matter to me that much. First Trinitron I've seen in the wild and it was only $15.

>>823945
Never mind, just plugged in a normal audio cable and it was loud as fuck.

>>823851
Those shots are from a consumer Trinitron, and while I know it doesn't entirely compare to a PVM, the picture quality is still far better than I've had on any other CRT. "True" scanlines or no, I imagine it's as good as one would get with a consumer TV. Better than this bullshit: >>820747

>>823982
You better believe it's better!

>>823939
>Looks like that's just a vomposite monitor, Bro. Might look a little nicer than a consumer tron but not by much

Fine for everything older than SNES

>>823851
Bullshit. You can see scan lines on any CRT, it's just that the visibility of them depends on various factors.

>>823827
Depends on your definition of a fighting game. Some people maintain that the term is limited strictly to multiplayer arena combat.

>>824018
Well it's fine for NES anyway. Unmodified Atari consoles use RF though and that tron has no tuner. Commodores and shit have RGB out, as do Master Systems.

>>823851
Shadow masks are a piece of sheet metal with holes punched in it. Aperture grilles are a wire grid. The latter is supposed to be sharper and allow more of the electron beam's energy to strike the phosphor.

>>824031
>Unmodified Atari consoles use RF though and that tron has no tuner
Can be solved by running the console through a VCR
>Commodores and shit have RGB out
Amigas do, 8-bit Commodores don't (although they do have S-video). Also Amiga has separated sync so you need a converter to merge it into composite sync.

>>824040
A word of caution: The S-video on the C64/128 is slightly nonstandard because it predates the actual introduction of S-video in 1987. You will need a converter cable to connect its RCA jacks to a standard DIN S-video plug, but some TVs/monitors might react strangely to it (Commodore monitors were specifically tuned for their signal)

>>824028
While your argument isn't as ridiculous as that guy claiming Final Fight is a fighting game, it's still pretty ridiculous.

>>824065
Original title of Final Fight is Street Fighter '89, therefore fighting game.

>>824040
Better use a Sony VCR for your RF converter into that Sony display and you don't need a converter to combine H+V sync you can just merge them. People even do it on PVMs by plugging the other half of the sync into the video OUT plug for the channel they're using and I'm told that it works.

>>824075
>Titles dictate genre
No. Final Fight is the definition of a beat-em-up.

>>824076
>>824040
The VCR trick won't produce as good results as proper composite, although it will look at least somewhat better than straight RF.

I think Punch Out is one of those games that is like Zelda in that it defies an exact genre definition.

>>824076
Of course we have no need of PVMs in Europe where we've always had RGB and dual NTSC/PAL support

>>824092
PVMs are mostly a hipster thing; a decent consumer TV with S-video is more than sufficient for gaming.

>>808360
>>823939
So now that people have accepted that "native resolutions" on the Wii are just hacks, and that it can't output true 240p like a Dreamcast can, and is just another XBox...who will be the first to hook their PC up and run GroovyMAME and mednafen at native resolutions for real? With custom resolutions from CRT_Emudriver or Soft15khz?