-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Who still rocks a CRT monitor?
- Thread starter Wendo
- Start date
- Status
HappyBivouac
Member
basic_element said:
Agree. But shit like this is hilarious so whatever.
Fugu said:
Geometry, pixel sharpness, flicker.
Even noise (a lot of CRTs even the good ones produced a definite high pitched whine) is a factor.
and trinitrons weren't just monitors. They were TVs as well. But they were basically the high end Sony TVs for over 2-3 decades, just like Bravias describe the high end Sony LCDs nowadays.
basic_element said:
It's meant to be dorky. Like you take something that's not cool at all to the general public and joke about it being cool. Think of a cute girl coming over to your house and being like, "Dude! YOU ARE ROCKING THOSE DUAL FW900S!", when in realilty she'd be like, "Are those beige things from the 90's?"
Geometry is easily fixable by correctly calibrating a monitor. Comparing incorrectly calibrated monitors is an entirely wasted exercise.Zaptruder said:
Sharpness depends largely on the quality of the monitor. Sharpness is a non-issue even on mid-quality CRTs.
Flicker hasn't been a problem for about a decade. There are millions of CRTs available capable of refresh rates above 72Hz (mine goes up to 120) at which point flicker is entirely imperceptible, even through peripheral vision.
The noise that CRTs can produce is a result of the NTSC and PAL standards and not really CRT technology.
As for 480p Trinitrons, CRT technology was only employed for televisions when support for any resolution beyond that was unnecessary. CRTs are more than capable of resolutions higher than that and it's difficult to knock CRTs for being compatible with what the market alloted to them.
Naked Snake
Member
LCD is much better for reading text, and that's 99% of what I do on the computer, so...
My main monitor is a 1080p LCD, but I keep a CRT on the side for certain things, like gaming with emulators. The motion blur on LCDs with nearest-neighbor-scaled emulated games really bothers me. I honestly never want to give it up, but I know it'll die someday, and I'll have to deal with it.
Naked Snake said:
not really, a good crt is nearly as sharp as lcd and you wont get any eye strain due to flicker since you'll likely be using a refresh rate of 100hz or more.
one of the big reasons to get lcd was to make things easier on the eyes but that has actually reversed due to the crazy brightness levels lcds come with by default. unless you adjust your lcd correctly odds are you're giving yourself more eye strain than a crt.
Fugu said:
Yes, you can get some decent high end CRTs if you hunt around. The point to be made is that in pursuit of the lingering advantages of a superseded technology (in this case CRT), some of the more extreme completely lose sight of the advantages that the newer technology provides.
The CRT-ophile crowd reminds me of the record play crowd. Maybe there'll even be a resurgence despite the availability of much superior technology in the years ahead.
I found our concept artist using an old Trinitron today (as a secondary monitor) which he said was fine once it warmed up, and indeed, the image quality was decent, but it's the only one I've ever seen in any of our departments and to be honest I'm not sure where he actually found it.
Which is to say that despite the 'superior qualities' they've pretty much been phased out of this end of the professional creative industry too.
Which is to say that despite the 'superior qualities' they've pretty much been phased out of this end of the professional creative industry too.
MarkMclovin
Member
I have a 15" CRT, but right next to it, I have a 40" Sony Bravia 2. Only thing is, is my graphics card only has a DVI out and the TV doens't have DVI in, but when I use a VGA converter, it looks shit.
sixteen-bit
Member
I have a CRT that I rotate for vertically scrolling shooting games on my 360 and Dreamcast through VGA. It's not really used for my computer.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
We still have tons of them at ILM. A lot of work's being done on LCDs, but anything relating to color is done on CRT.Wendo said:
Xapati said:
Native resolution with refreshrates above what LCD or the other platforms offer. Color quality is still king and shadows don't suck watching dark movies is actually enjoyable with casting issues. If you can find some of the better lcd models laying around they are cheaper and still much better than most lcds. I rock both but if I had the space and time I'd replace this 24" lcd with another gdm fw900 which there is no flat planel on the market as good as it.
radios shipping overview
Member
I don't "rock" it, but I do have a nice Sony video-production Trinitron with RGB input that I use with 480i consoles.
For PCs, I'm all LCD.
For PCs, I'm all LCD.
SlipperySlope
Banned
I still use a 19 inch CRT at home. I also use a 17 inch for another computer.
Why? Because they haven't broken yet. I only replace monitors when they break.
Edit - Why waste money, you know?
Why? Because they haven't broken yet. I only replace monitors when they break.
Edit - Why waste money, you know?
thetechkid
Member
I got an old 15 inch CRT and a 22 inch LCD, and once I find another cheap LCD monitor I'm gonna get rid of the CRT and clearing up 12 acres of space on my desk.
speculawyer
Member
I still have some around but I haven't been using them.
I think CRTs definitely have some distinct advantages:
-Very fast response time
-Ability to handle many different resolutions natively (very important if you don't have the greatest video card and thus need to play with the settings to get a good frame rate).
-Nice brightness
But the form factor sucks. Your desk needs to be big.
I think CRTs definitely have some distinct advantages:
-Very fast response time
-Ability to handle many different resolutions natively (very important if you don't have the greatest video card and thus need to play with the settings to get a good frame rate).
-Nice brightness
But the form factor sucks. Your desk needs to be big.
I have three total. Two are matching black NEC flat tube monitors. One is 17" and the other is 19". My main I use now is a 21" Sony Trinitron CRT. I have a corner computer desk with a deep table so the size of the monitor really isn't an issue. They all look nice, work great, have awesome color, and were all free. Hell yes.
Also, I'm jealous of how many people here have an FW900. I've always wanted one or two.
Also, I'm jealous of how many people here have an FW900. I've always wanted one or two.
I finally made the switch at the end of 2009 by switching from a 19 inch (iirc) CRT to a dell U2410. Although I love the larger screen and how incredibly sharp everything is, I can't help but miss some aspects of my old CRT. Despite being an IPS panel, I still notice a slight bit of color banding on my LCD.
My CRT is still perfectly usable and quite good - it had good color and could do 1600x1200 at 85Hz or so, and maxed out at something like 2048x1536, though I never used that resolution much because I disliked 60 Hz refresh rates on CRTs. I didn't want to throw it away so it still sits in a corner of my room.
My CRT is still perfectly usable and quite good - it had good color and could do 1600x1200 at 85Hz or so, and maxed out at something like 2048x1536, though I never used that resolution much because I disliked 60 Hz refresh rates on CRTs. I didn't want to throw it away so it still sits in a corner of my room.
Space Runaway
Member
Yeah I still have one. It's going now and need to smacked every so often to get rid of the dreaded yellow tint that pops up. I plan to get a new monitor but not until I get a new PC (Which won't be until Diablo 3 hits, whenever that ends up being).
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
SalsaShark said:
I did the same. My graphics card went out on me last summer, and I had a little extra cash to spare. So I got a new card and a 1080p monitor for under 300 bones on newegg, and I haven't looked back. My old CRT only did 1024x768. LOL :lol :lol
Sure the colors on my cheap TN panel aren't ZOMG spooge worthy, but it looks good enough color wise, I love my inputs, widescreen + aero snap rocks, and it's awesome for PC gaming.
PS: I can totally see why CRTs still rock, but I just don't have that need at home verses the benefits it brings me.
In the light of market pressure and the popularity of newer technologies, it's easy for people to completely lose sight of the advantages that the older technologies provide. When comparing high-end product, CRTs will always have better image quality (if both are correctly calibrated), will be capable of more resolutions natively, will have an exponentially lower response time, will have better blacks, and will be much cheaper (you can get high-end CRTs for $25 -- largely because of their bulky size and power consumption compared to small panels). LCDs present many advantages over mid-range or uncalibrated CRTs (namely in the areas of geometry and flicker) but otherwise generally lose in the image quality category. For many people, it's worth the sacrifice in image quality (which is quite significant if you're used to a quality CRT, which many people aren't) for a physically much smaller unit with a larger screen that doesn't require much in the way of calibration (not nearly to the extent of a CRT) and that may or may not use less power than a high-end CRT (this depends on the amount of backlighting). For some people, it's not, and I suspect the minority is such an extreme one because a quality, correctly configured CRT is rare to such a degree that most people simply cannot believe statements that a CRT is capable of looking much better than a modern, good LCD.Zaptruder said:
The record player issue is somewhat more complex although it is a solid example of an older technology remaining relevant due to its superiority in certain areas despite relatively large inconveniences that it imposes. The places the analogy falls apart, however, are the respective barriers of entry (A good record player is expensive and requires expensive equipment relative to the equipment required by its competition, whereas a CRT is ten times cheaper or more) and the objectivity of the quality difference (Analog vs. Digital is sketchy, black vs. "black" is not).
The reason pursuists exist is because the technology has been replaced but not superseded.
CrookedRain
Member
My old CRT started going bad and I had to buy an LCD a couple of years back. I suppose the LCD is more convenient (easier to set up, takes up less space, etc.) but I miss all the advantages of a nice CRT. I always liked being able to play older games or run games at a lower resolution for performance benefits without having it look like a blurry mess as it does on an LCD.
maniac-kun
Member
arent crt users blind yet?
- Status