Finally ditched the flat panels!

[microsoft windows]

Got a few new CRT monitors yesterday. They handle much better refresh rates and get better picture than the LCD's. So, now, all 8 of my desktops that I have set up have CRT monitors.

[a_fluffy_kitten]

New?

No one here believes that.

[microsoft windows]

Well, they were new about 9 years ago. But still very good, sharp displays.

[Brian8bit]

Trinitrons?

[Daniel Beaver]

Excellent. I love CRTs, I wish I had space for one.

[Fwiffo]

I like the higher contrast and better color of CRTs. I hate the weight, size, poor geometry and blurriness.

[microsoft windows]

I like the higher contrast and better color of CRTs. I hate the weight, size, poor geometry and blurriness.

Good CRT displays are as sharp as LCD's. But sometimes, the tube can get out of focus on some and make them blurry.

[godly_music]

I've taken the safety glass off my microwave and modified it to display the most VIBRANT COLOURS you have ever seen.

[Fwiffo]

Good CRT displays are as sharp as LCD's. But sometimes, the tube can get out of focus on some and make them blurry.

I've owned really nice CRTs. They are not as sharp; it's just not possible to get the pixels perfectly aligned with the shadow mask, even on Trinitron. And even the best ones have imperfect geometry.

They also are pretty hard to get at decent resolutions. I have a 19" Sony Trinitron, which does OK at 1600x1200, but my preferred desktop size is 2560x1600.

I do hate LCDs though. Why isn't anyone getting to work on the next generation of display technology? SED/FED is dead, OLED seems to be dropping the ball, plasma seems to be TV only (and rare at that...)

[zefrer]

This one?

[msiegel]

Why isn't anyone getting to work on the next generation of display technology?

SED was gonna be awesome. Maybe someone will pick up where Canon left off

[keyb_gr]

SED was gonna be awesome.

Not sure whether that also applies to this one.
(Some folks around here also found "DDR-SDRAM" slightly amusing.)

[Shawn Stanford]

F* CRTs. They're heavy, bulky and expensive. I'll take a chance on sharpness in exchange for convenience. Same reason I favor DVD and even well-compacted MP3s over vinyl: I want 5000 songs in my pocket more than theoretical sonic perfection I can't hear anyway.

Back in my day we had 8" green CRTs displaying 24x80 with no graphics and we were THANKFUL! A 27" HD TV/Monitor at 1360x768? That's PROGRESS!

Now get the hell off my lawn!

[a_fluffy_kitten]

poor geometry

Amen.  Even the best CRT can **** right off for that reason alone.

[msiegel]

this one

that one offers excellent reproduction of reds and pinks

[microsoft windows]

F* CRTs. They're heavy, bulky and expensive.

Wrong. They're heavy and bulky, but dirt cheap.

[ch_123]

The ones that are better than good LCDs are ludicrously expensive.

[NamelessPFG]

Why isn't anyone getting to work on the next generation of display technology? SED/FED is dead, OLED seems to be dropping the ball, plasma seems to be TV only (and rare at that...)

I think there's still some promise in AMOLED, but production really needs to ramp up. At the moment, most OLED screens of any sort are phone-size. (Maybe one day, we'll have 2560x1600 displays that roll up like papyrus scrolls for easy transport...)

Currently, our best hope seems to lie in laser DLP, like the Mitsubishi LaserVue sets. (Now if those just supported 120 Hz input, or had a resolution of 1920x1200 or even 2560x1600...)

All I know is that there's a better way to rendering digital images than putting a color filter over a white light background for sure, though IPS and AFFS+ panels do deliver respectable image quality and viewing angles that don't completely suck. Too bad I can't get the thrift store/craigslist discount on them like I can FD Trinitrons and Diamondtron NFs.

Anyway, while I hate geometry errors (especially corner pincushion and linearity problems I can't solve through just the OSD), and while I HATE convergence errors, the lack of perceptible input lag and native resolution issues coupled with high refresh rates still make CRTs the current go-to display tech for gaming purposes.

[Moneyless]

F* CRTs. They're heavy, bulky and expensive. I'll take a chance on sharpness in exchange for convenience. Same reason I favor DVD and even well-compacted MP3s over vinyl: I want 5000 songs in my pocket more than theoretical sonic perfection I can't hear anyway.

Back in my day we had 8" green CRTs displaying 24x80 with no graphics and we were THANKFUL! A 27" HD TV/Monitor at 1360x768? That's PROGRESS!

Now get the hell off my lawn!

TBH 1366x768 is not that impressive of a resolution for a 27" screen. Guess it must be an early "HD 720p" HDTV set you got some years ago. :redface:


As has already been said by other members, I too prefer a good LCD these days as they are sharper and take much less room... Plus, unless you're a fighter pilot or something not many people really notice the difference between 60 Hz and the higher refresh rates CRTs support.

There is also the fact that since all manufacturers seem to have abandoned CRT technology, it would be very hard to find 16:10 widescreen CRTs (from what I have seen anyway). Heck, even finding 16:10 LCDs is getting harder with the flood of all the 16:9 LCDs into the market as people buy into the "Full HD!!!!! omgsuperorgasmicpicture, srsly!" marketing hype.

Plus, LCDs make it easier to run a multi-monitor setup without needing a gargantuan desk.

[Pylon]

I like my NEC MultiSync with what I believe to be a Diamondtron tube. Absolutely beautiful image, but the max-85Hz refresh kills my eyes, so I'm using a much worse 14" Panaflat LC40 (from 1998...early TNs suck in almost every respect compared to CRTs except size and geometry...don't even get me started on viewing angles, massive gamma shifts when viewed only slightly off angle, banding, flicker from dithering, light bands in rows where there's dark stuff, etc.). The NEC gets relegated to photo editing chores only.

And the NEC has a clicky power switch, and a nice zzzzzzzz-cluk sound when powering up.

[Fwiffo]

CRTs NEED higher refresh rates because they flicker. LCD elements stay illuminated between refreshes, so 60Hz is enough. 60Hz looks like a strobe light on a CRT; anything under about 85Hz gives me a headache. Unfortunately going to a higher refresh rate limits the resolution you're using.

If you look at OLED articles from a few years ago they show roadmaps featuring 30" or 40" OLED TVs in 2010 or 2011. Now you see product announcements for 5" OLED panels for tablets or phones or whatever, but no roadmaps, and no signs of monitor-sized displays on the horizon.

I've never been impressed with DLP, so I feel like we're going to be stuck with stupid LCDs for at least another decade.

I don't care about transparent or flexible screens, I don't need a screen 2mm thick, I just want a flat screen, high-resolution screen with no geometry or blurring problems that can display the color black. Is that too much to ask?

[Fwiffo]

Well, 3D is one reason to use a 120Hz LCD.

[Arc'xer]

120hz LCDs.  Even CNET has a hard time seeing the difference.

That's because 99% of the television have fake interpolation 120hz. Either picture creation(soap opera effect) or BFI(black frame insertion).

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1496801&highlight=120hz

These are real 120hz LCDs. Not fake interpolation bull**** the industry jams down everyones throat. Technically speak it IS 120 but through frame-rate manipulation and not the refresh rate itself.

As has already been said by other members, I too prefer a good LCD these days as they are sharper and take much less room... Plus, unless you're a fighter pilot or something not many people really notice the difference between 60 Hz and the higher refresh rates CRTs support.

Unfortunately this is the sad truth people really need to start paying attention this or else we are gonna be stuck with 60Hz for a long time. Sheer fact is most of the time these **** sets the industry standard. I mean just a few years ago we had CRTs capable of 200Hz sure at a lower resolution but that speaks volumes of the refresh capability of them hell I wouldn't be surprised if there were companies working on 240Hz refresh rate CRT monitor/televisions, it sure is seen with SED/FED if it didn't die off for the time being.


And no you do not need to be a fighter pilot to notice these things back in the late 90s, early 00s some people were using such high refresh rates when gaming that they could guesstimate the refresh rate it was not unheard of some guesstimating the differences between say 144Hz and 180Hz or 75Hz and 90Hz or whatever.

In reality most people won't see a difference because refresh rate to them becomes very muscle memory. If you have real 120Hz spend a few days to a week gaming on it and then go back to 60Hz and you will notice just how different it is. There are people out there who can't even tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS, it's something you need to experience first hand to understand.

http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=225060&postcount=27

http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=225091&postcount=29

http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=225096&postcount=30

Couple of posts I made on a thread on a similar issue.

Well, 3D is one reason to use a 120Hz LCD.

3D is pointless and a hindrance to better refresh rates your basically buying a monitor/television to see it at the same refresh rate you were seeing it before with a 3D effect.

Though it makes a good front for higher refresh rates. It sure has pisses off the manufacturers because people are seeing the limitations of LCD response time and for the time being just sending out gimmicky LEDs to hold them off to drain a bit more money before moving unto OLED.

[Fwiffo]

I hardly think 3D is pointless; I mean, you have two eyes for a reason. There's probably not an advantage for competitive gaming, but more and more movies are being filmed in 3D.

[instantkamera]

We saw "How to Train A Dragon" on BluRay last night.  That was one of the few times where I wish I had seen it in 3D.

Did you pick up some good pointers?

[Lanx]

imagine if you were colorblind like me, i only care about refresh rate(not an issue w/ modern day flatpanels) viewing angle and resolution. Your lives would be easier!

[microsoft windows]

I'm just cheap and can easily get CRT monitors that can handle over 100Hz refresh rates for free.

[Fwiffo]

I'm just cheap and can easily get CRT monitors that can handle over 100Hz refresh rates for free.

But at what resolution?

[microsoft windows]

1600x1200 for one, another 1152x864, the other two, 1024x768.

[microsoft windows]

By the way, here are some photos of my new monitors!

[Shawn Stanford]

Crikey, that's frightening...

[NamelessPFG]

Couple of posts I made on a thread on a similar issue.

LCD refresh rates, backlighting, and 3DTV
Plasma refresh rates
Framerate tricks

Is it all right if I start linking these posts elsewhere? It might help get the point across on other forums.

Better yet, you may want to write a comprehensive display technology guide or something to help correct all these misconceptions. It may turn out better to have a dedicated page for this sort of thing than random forum posts from a place most people have never heard of.

Oh, and I'd also like to know if there are any inherent issues with the DMDs central to DLP displays that could prevent laser DLP (Mitsubishi LaserVue) from reaching its full potential and surpassing the best of CRTs. (There is no color wheel, so there shouldn't be a rainbow effect, and the lasers take the place of the usual white bulbs as well, also being rated for a much longer life and thus shouldn't need to be regularly replaced.)

[instantkamera]

Is it all right if I start linking these posts elsewhere? It might help get the point across on other forums.

The problem is, I think in some of those posts, HE is re-enforcing other misconceptions.

Like "120hz TVs aren't really 120hz". Technically, they ARE. the panel refreshes 120 times a second, this has NOTHING to do with software/interpolation etc.

Those "fake" technologies come into play when deciding WHAT the panel displays for those frames that aren't in the source, because the real LIE is that these TV will NOT accept 120hz input. This is where motion interpolation creates the soap opera effect, or BFI can be used, or a simple frame repetition (which is beneficial for 24p film content).

[NamelessPFG]

The problem is, I think in some of those posts, HE is re-enforcing other misconceptions.

Like "120hz TVs aren't really 120hz". Technically, they ARE. the panel refreshes 120 times a second, this has NOTHING to do with software/interpolation etc.

Those "fake" technologies come into play when deciding WHAT the panel displays for those frames that aren't in the source, because the real LIE is that these TV will NOT accept 120hz input. This is where motion interpolation creates the soap opera effect, or BFI can be used, or a simple frame repetition (which is beneficial for 24p film content).

Good clarification and counter-point there.

That's actually a concern that came to mind when I was reading off the specs list of the Mitsubishi LaserVue L65-A90, touted as 3D-capable, presumably in the shutterglasses sense. PC input-wise, it only mentioned resolutions at 60 Hz, never 120 Hz. Quite a bummer if it really is a 120 Hz display, and one costing US$6,000+ at that.

It may very well be that what's holding all these displays back has more to do with the crappy control circuitry and firmware driving them. I know that I have this absolutely ****ty 19", 1280x1024 "TV" that has a component input and accepts 720p, Too bad 720p is not only stretched vertically to totally **** up the aspect ratio, but it's also shifted to the right about an inch and doesn't let you do a god damn thing about it. In addition, non-native resolution scaling is ATROCIOUS. The only thing remotely good that I have to say about it is that I don't perceive significant input lag. Perhaps it would be more viable if it would just display 720p properly centered and letterboxed.

(Oh, and don't ask for DVI or HDMI. VGA and component are the best you get on that thing.)

On to the student center over at uni, there are a couple of LG 1366x768 plasma panels (and I know they're plasmas just because of slight image retention from the OSD) that have some significant input lag. Not good when people are playing fighting games on them (or any sort of game, really, but especially fighting games). There are no options to reduce it. By contrast, the LCDs in the game lab are far more tweakable from the OSD; they can easily allow the user to sacrifice rendering quality for not having so much damn input lag.

Basically, the real problem is that the product manufacturers think they know better than the user and deny us our options to use the product as we feel best.

[zefrer]

What he said

[instantkamera]

Good clarification and counter-point there.

That's actually a concern that came to mind when I was reading off the specs list of the Mitsubishi LaserVue L65-A90, touted as 3D-capable, presumably in the shutterglasses sense. PC input-wise, it only mentioned resolutions at 60 Hz, never 120 Hz. Quite a bummer if it really is a 120 Hz display, and one costing US$6,000+ at that.

It may very well be that what's holding all these displays back has more to do with the crappy control circuitry and firmware driving them. I know that I have this absolutely ****ty 19", 1280x1024 "TV" that has a component input and accepts 720p, Too bad 720p is not only stretched vertically to totally **** up the aspect ratio, but it's also shifted to the right about an inch and doesn't let you do a god damn thing about it. In addition, non-native resolution scaling is ATROCIOUS. The only thing remotely good that I have to say about it is that I don't perceive significant input lag. Perhaps it would be more viable if it would just display 720p properly centered and letterboxed.

(Oh, and don't ask for DVI or HDMI. VGA and component are the best you get on that thing.)

On to the student center over at uni, there are a couple of LG 1366x768 plasma panels (and I know they're plasmas just because of slight image retention from the OSD) that have some significant input lag. Not good when people are playing fighting games on them (or any sort of game, really, but especially fighting games). There are no options to reduce it. By contrast, the LCDs in the game lab are far more tweakable from the OSD; they can easily allow the user to sacrifice rendering quality for not having so much damn input lag.

Basically, the real problem is that the product manufacturers think they know better than the user and deny us our options to use the product as we feel best.

Tell me about it wrt tvs. Im looking to buy something in the 58-65" range, finding the perfect TV seems to be near impossible, especially in that range. There are a lot of features that ought to be STANDARD in any tv (such as a low input lag option) that unfortunately are not. WHY? Because catch phrases like "3D" and "LED" sell more sets. LAME. Don't hold your breath for 120hz input, nothing in the avg joes entertainment setup outputs that (TV makers have spoken, and clearly they do not think the avg Joe has a PC hooked up to their TV).

[microsoft windows]

I've never really been into big-screen televisions. A 19" is plenty for me.

[instantkamera]

I've never really been into big-screen televisions. A 19" is plenty for me.

ignorance is bliss... Ever been to a movie theater?

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

I think he would change his mind if he saw what true HD looks like... HD on an HDTV is quite the experience...

[chimera15]

I'd ditch my lcd's if someone came up with a good and affordable one of these:



Anyone here tried/have/use one?

[microsoft windows]

I bet if there was one for each eye, they could work out some soft of 3-D viewing thing.

[chimera15]

They have those, mvyu and Vuzix.  The good ones are still $1000+, and they're not really built for computers, but things like ipods and xbox's and use rca plugs which sucks.

[ch_123]

ignorance is bliss... Ever been to a movie theater?

Those films promote communism and homosexuality.

[instantkamera]

Those films promote communism and homosexuality.

They never made hee-haw for the big screen?

[Arc'xer]

Better yet, you may want to write a comprehensive display technology guide or something to help correct all these misconceptions. It may turn out better to have a dedicated page for this sort of thing than random forum posts from a place most people have never heard of.

Yeah I'd really want to,to  be honest but I just type so uneloquently it's going to turn out to be a rather crap guide. Plus I'm not the creative type so it's going to be just a jumbo of words. Really I think it's such a shame so many lie every once in a while I run into post by people who really should not even be posting things because it's so full of ****. Either they are working for some corporation and are trying to misinform people on purpose like some LCD company plant who just goes randomly around tech forums explaining **** or is as in my case an arm chair expert who doesn't know how to separate the bull**** from the real ****.

Sheer fact is I don't claim to be an expert on the subject or anything just putting things out there that I've read. Though I agree a guide would be a great thing but I think it's more of a small group of people that really care. And I could be wrong in a few things as some have pointed out.

Most people are like "Ehh who the **** cares just want a big TV that plays things". Similar to calibrating your screen, most are like who cares if red is red or green is green just want to watch TV.

And in reality most people don't really give two ****s about their television. Though a little bit more to their computer screen still that attitude exists for both sets of fields almost equally.

[Scarzy]

What models/makes you got?

Still on my Mitshubishi Diamond Plus 220, has a chip in the screen but it's pretty sweet. Going to get a 24" LCD eventually when I stop playing games, but right now this is the best thing going.

Pictures look sweet as well, where did you grab them from, MSW?

[microsoft windows]

ignorance is bliss... Ever been to a movie theater?

Not in a long time. It's a rip-off. They charge 5 bucks for a Hershey's bar or a cup of popcorn with fake butter that probably causes cancer, and I got to drive 30 minutes to get to one anyways.

[db_Iodine]

I really couldn't do my 3x24" setup with CRT's. Well maybe in theory I could, but I'd need a stronger desk and also the bezels of the CRT's would be too much.

[microsoft windows]

You have to.

"I got to" suggests that someone gave you the privilege of doing it.

You oughta join a grammar forum. And then they'd get mad at you for spelling the word color wrong. :canada:

[ch_123]

Colour