/tech/ - Soyence and Technology

>any real benefits to using crt
it looks cool
>laaarp
kys
>ik that it has like good blacks and colors in generals
i dont know who the fuck said this it just looks cool
>but lacks with resolution
literally has infinite resoltuion because it has no pixels

CRT autism general is this way >>32503 (OP)

They make a 'g like noise

>>39189 (OP)
Nigger 3rd thread about CRT

>good blacks and colors in generals
They have perfect blacks but the tube reflects a lot of light so they don't look great outside darkness
>but lacks with resolution
Depends on the tube but the antialiasing effect makes the resolution look much higher than it actually is. I would never use one above 1600x1200 ever. And much lower is great so long as whatever UI scales nicely. Higher might be good for productivity but this is not a modern usecase

>>39189 (OP)
>composite video
Probably looks like shit because of this. Tons of TV CRTs were purposely crippled with a lack of any other inputs for (((market segmentation))). Even though adding RGB or s-video was basically free, the manufacturing for the tube was much harder to change.

I have 3 CRT tvs, my father got them for less than 50 bucks. Idk about CRT screens

>>39207
do they work you could make a le hecking cozy gaming
area where you play only games made for a crt tv or something

>>39208
Using them for only period torrent stuff is IAS

>>39213
>torrent
Obsessed autocorrect I said correct

>>39189 (OP)
Motion clarity.
Really old games can SOMETIMES look better.
That's it. It's genuinely worse in every other way. Nostalgiafags need to find God instead of worshiping technology.

>>39222
stop spreading this retarded reddit motion clarity meme, CRTs have horrible ghosting

>>39236
I would argue the instant initial response time and lack of overdrive ghosting makes them more tolerable than most displays, but yeah, the idea that its perfect was made up by retarded IASs. Its probably a carry over from the period and also a misunderstanding that response time isn't symmetric

>>39244
Some phosphors really do have 1 microsecond persistence though. Basically instantaneous

it makes oldniggers like me feel warm and fuzzy

>>39189 (OP)
the local high school still has their original crts from the 90s when it was built i really want to get a hold of them

>>39236
They all have issues, but a clean and smooth leading edge to an object moving across a screen is going to be more useful in things like fast paced games. This is why VA, especially the modern panels used in high end TVs, aren't actually as bad as people say they are in normal use. Keep in mind I know CRTs are massively overrated. OLED is becoming the next issue, with people ignorant of judder, which actually screws up predictability of motion. Especially with a variable framerate. That's why you'll see some people say gaming on OLED gives them headaches. Another problem is near-black performance of OLED. Contrary to common knowledge, all OLED subpixels have a hard time retaining accuracy when displaying very dark content. OLEDs handle power a bit like a cheap LED lightbulb that flickers when you put it on a dimmer switch. OLEDs compromise blacks in 3 ways, and it depends on the one the manufacturer settles on, or how you calibrate the display yourself in some cases:

- Crushed blacks that remove detail in dark areas by turning off entirely.
- Raised blacks, so that you see the detail, but it's brighter than it should be.
- Try to retain technical luminance accuracy as best as possible, but there will be visual artifacting due to the lightbulb comparison I made.

They're getting better, but in truth OLED is not an endgame technology itself because the organic material (The "O" in "OLED") holds it back.


RGB miniLED has issues with color crosstalk and reduced zone counts compared to regular minLED so processing can keep up with refresh rates and motion in general, which is why TCL's best TV right now (X11L) is still regular miniLED. We're more sensitive to changes in contrast than to color accuracy in general, so focusing on contrast improvements and reduced blooming is still the better call in the LCD space.

All displays suck in their own ways, it's just up to you to personally decide what kind of suck is the easiest for you to live with.

But yeah, CRT is easily the worst overall these days. I'm talking about actual modern displays from the past 3 years, not the 14 year old LCD monitors that troons are always referring too.

They generally have a very different image to a LCD/LED display. If you like it, its good for stuff of the era. I'd like one to play old games on and because I like the quirks it has, like static on the screen or the sounds it makes. That part is purely nostalgia doebeit.

Theres little to no reason to use it for anything modern doe. In the times of LCD displays I think it would hard mog them, as the colours are nicer and it doesn't have as bad viewing angles. LED is very nice now, and OLED exists too, so theres not much use left in a CRT.

>>39801
Yeah, this sums it up pretty well. CRTs were still probably the best choice in the early days of LCDs, and also Plasma TVs. But screen technology has moved on, and theres no real reason outside of special interest in oldfag electronics to want a CRT. Especially since its a massive pain to connect anything, as you have to convert your digital HDMI/DP to Analog input