20 years later

>Breaking an arm is not as bad because breaking a leg is worse.

LOL! Very nice.

Trinitrons look even better.

Attached: pvm.jpg (4032x3024, 3.03M)

Limp wristed poorfag.

Plasma has all the advantages of a CRT but with a superior form factor

>uses the same phosphors as CRTs
>better contrast than any TV except the highest end OLEDs (black actually turns the pixel off)
>not nearly as bulky as CRTs
>near 0 input lag
And best of all:
>dirt cheap now that everyone is buying meme smartTVs

There is literally no reason to buy a CRT instead of a used plasma in 2019

Attached: 1920px-Plasma-display-composition.svg.png (1920x1440, 381K)

No HDR.

It has the disadvantage of fixed pixel resolution.

uh...no

>Fixed pixels

Attached: 1487358039320.jpg (1631x1373, 1.13M)

burn in lmao

>uses the same phosphors as CRTs
Not true. SED would have used the same phosphors, not plasma. Even the picture you posted shows this.
>better contrast than any TV except the highest end OLEDs
And except high end CRTs
>near 0 input lag
Not true at all. Plasmas, being so early into the digital display age, have extremely laggy image processing chains.
Also, you forgot
>Burns in as quickly as OLED, while CRTs have to display a still image for months for it to cause any visible damage to the phosphors

>Plasma has all the advantages of a CRT but with a superior form factor
find me a 10 year old daily driver plasma tv that works

>Plasma has all the advantages of a CRT
Plasmas have input lag. CRTs do not.
Also no 240p

MicroLED will bring back real image quality.

That's just a meme.

What monitors besides CRT have literally 0 input lag?

HDR requires greater bit-depths and allows content to directly control brightness of pixels. A very bright light bulb is not the same brightness as the sun.

Nothing. CRTs only have 0 input lag because they're completely analog devices, right down to the method used to render images.
i.imgur.com/71oFLHk.gifv
Too lazy to convert

What monitors besides CRT have literally 0 input lag?
None. No other display technology can work without processing the signal between the input source and the display panel.
>HDR requires greater bit-depths and allows content to directly control brightness of pixels.
Which isn't of much use when none of the current display technologies apart from OLED can either display such a wide contrast nor turn individual pixels off.

It's hugely useful, even without the extremely high contrasts you'd need to show the sun next to something dark. For one it completely gets rid of banding simply because it requires higher bit depths per channel. It also allows you to control by color and brightness, instead of purely by color alone. SDR is very restrictive compared to HDR just from a software point of view. Saying full red green and blue should mean full bright white is a horribly simplified way of looking at human vision.

Show pic faggot

Why is imgur dog poop on mobile? Takes over 10s to load and then tapping the green play button does nothing. All that was required was a simple mp4 file, and they served me this heap instead.

Attached: Screenshot_20190225-215622_Firefox.jpg (1440x2560, 759K)

use opengur

Later generation plasmas (post 2008 or so) fixed the burn in with improved panel technology and software.

My Samsung plasma has been running since 2011 and has no burn-in. I regularly leave videos paused and don't take any special precautions to prevent burn in

CRTs are obsolete, grandpa. Nobody who lives outside of their mother's basement wants to own a bulky low resolution CRT

I haven't seen a CRTfag thread on Jow Forums in 10 years, nice to know there's still one of them left who hasn't died of cancer yet.

CRTs have no input lag is the worst meme on this board.

They do not have input lag. Any lag is due to whatever is between your input and the video on the TV.

I know. That 15 ft of vga cable sure adds several ns of lag to the signal. I can tell.

Where's my ips led backlit 2048x1536?

CRTs cap out at about 120Hz, nice try though.

Do you understand how a cathode ray tube works? They do have input lag but it is very low, not as low as OLEDs can be with current (though not cost effective) tech though.

There's a lag in every interaction in the universe. Information can only travel at the speed of light. The input lag on a CRT, assuming no lag between you pressing a button and the output being sent to the screen, is going to be limited by the speed of the electrons through the copper, silicon, and the electron gun itself. All of that happens at nearly the speed of light, so for pretty much any real world use case that means it's instant.
At most you'd probably have to measure the input lag in nanoseconds, if even that.

Yes. How do you think large tubes function?

The Chad CRT
>inarguably superior image quality
>little if any input lag
>capable of many different resolutions with no noticeable drop in quality
>big, strong and alpha as fuck. demands you to respect it's space
>inevitably ancient and therefore much wiser
>emits a high pitched whine that immediately gives weak LCDfags permanent tinnitus
>kills cancer cells with built-in radiation therapy, putting chemo patient LCDfags on suicide watch

The virgin LCD
>beta nu-male sleek design
>blacks are shit. so are the blacks on an LCD
>tries desperately to support its native resolution well, but it still looks better non-natively on the Chad CRT
>zoomers choice, like fortnite or tide pods
>emits no noise at all, just sits in the corner of your room silently like a cuck
>enjoys being a 1ms or more behind realtime, getting owned at every competitive game where a CRT Chad is present
>soon to be obsolete when CRT Chads overthrow the industry once again

They have this thread on /vr/ as well.

You have to be a retarded teen or 20-something to honestly believe that CRT tech was really worth the heft, bulk, and price because it could do things only marginally faster.

Attached: disgust.jpg (600x448, 21K)

They're literally only limited by the speed of light. This is top tier pedantry.

>39▶
no they dont

Electrons and photons in mediums don't travel at C constant.

Attached: idiot_clap.png (488x463, 28K)

CRT faggots annoy me I moved on from them almost 20 years ago can you shitters contain yourself to /vr/

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the Internet and tell lies?

HDR is a meme.

10-bit color is also a meme. Banding is avoidable through proper production.

barely on-topic post:

If I have a monitor which is listed to have a maximum 370 nits brightness, and I want to run it in 200 nits brightness without using a spectrometer can I just do the following

>monitor has brightness control that goes from 0-256
>370 / 256 = 1.445
>200 / 1.445 = 138.4

Therefore I set my monitor to brightness setting 138 to get approximately 200 nits brightness, right? Or am I missing something?

Attached: HJPLVQ.jpg (236x203, 47K)

>input lag
Oh no, it takes 0.12 seconds longer for my remote to respond with a OLED TV. Call the fucking cops.

As much as I like crts they really are only good for low res content. Once you start increasing the res and lowering the refresh rate they are absolute trash. Also bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Okay. It's limited by the speed of light going through the VGA cable. Happy now?

I hope this is bait.

stop watching TV

Enjoy your burn in. Its a shame there is no screen technology yet without some kind of drawback. Response times, viewing angles, contrast ratio, burn in, its fucking current year this should be fixed.

Why not just use SED, FED or LVD?
The benefit of CRTs is the electron based light emission, they don't actually need the gun or tube.
I'm willing to bet nobody cares about the CRT part of a CRT display even if that's how they phrase it.
As long as it has the same benefits.

Attached: SED 01.gif (461x244, 13K)

No. CRT threads give you cancer though

I have never seen people get so irrationally mad about anything else besides CRTs. People crawl out of the woodwork to justify not having an alternative o the tech and/or not owning one. I legitimately wish I knew what was wrong with these people.
Like who are you trying to convince and why?
This isn't even a subjective topic, latency, color gamut, contrast, resolution limitations, etc. are all measurable.
You have people seriously suggesting the latest bleeding edge tech that isn't even released in most cases, and hardly affordable for consumers as an alternative to consumer displays from the 90's as if that's sensible from any perspective.
What in the fuck.

>For only $4,000 you can get an IPS display the size of a phone that still has a number of caveats and might die in 5 years

Oh yes phosphor ghosting and image misalignment is great image quality
What is dynamic super resolution

Oled blows CRT out of the fucking water
Because CRT fags drone on and on about dead technology that's vastly inferior sure it has no latency but the average screen has shit brightness to noes of other issues is small
Sed is dead everything besides lcd and led is dead

CRTs brainwashed the shit out of everyone.

Attached: maltese cross cathode ray tube.jpg (345x142, 5K)

Because people get tired of reading the same shit over and over again.

I don't get why people do this instead of picking or making a thread they like. With filters being part of the official extension, even the people who lack self control have no excuse.

Attached: 1477484458472.png (1800x1578, 199K)

If you want to circlejerk there's reddit for you.

>emits a high pitched whine that immediately gives weak LCDfags permanent tinnitus
>kills cancer cells with built-in radiation therapy, putting chemo patient LCDfags on suicide watch

>emits no noise at all, just sits in the corner of your room silently like a cuck

Kek'd audibly you're very talented user.

Attached: 1546313700520.jpg (640x350, 195K)

>We could have had 4k CRTs by now.
CRTs peaked around 130-140 kHz h-scan, which is only 2160p60 territory.
UHD@120+Hz would have been a nightmare to get working at the levels of precision people would be satisfied with.

> SED/FED meme
those things were always a false promise, sorry to break it to you

>Plasma has all the advantages of a CRT
Plasma can't modulate instantaneous electron beam power, just pulse duration. It's effectively per-subpixel PWM, except there are 8-10 logarithmically-sized time slices per 60 Hz frame that are on/off. For large flat areas of a scene with brightness levels close to 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, ..., you get really nasty 60 Hz flicker. Even if plasma could in principle go to 100+ Hz, only CRTs did in practice.

As the former owner of a very high-end CRT (v/h-flat 20"-vis 1600x1200@100 Hz), I admit that I miss the excellent motion clarity and clean resolution scaling. I don't miss the grayish blacks in a lit room, the size/weight, limited screen size, trinitron damping wire shadows, needing to fuck with screen geometry if I rotated the screen 10 degrees, or lack of a tack-sharp resolution.

There was never, ever going to be a CRT that could do something like 40" 8k@120+ Hz, but we will see something on that level in 5-10 years from LCDs (or ideally some form of LED panel).

CRT was a shit technology and I'm happy it's now obsolete.

My Grandfather got one of these new and still has it. They any good?

Attached: ha1l0igxa6fz.jpg (1200x806, 99K)

GAY BONERRRRRR

>can see literal pixels
>have to fiddle with geometry settings every time your resolution changes
>Still nothing that rivals CRT in terms of image quality
This has to be bait.

Ironically, complaining and voting against things you don't like is the traditional Reddit pattern while ignore and hide is the traditional imageboard pattern.

anything looks better than a slot mask

>not a PC monitor
no

>which is only 2160p60 territory.
That's 4k

>Proper production
lmao. Yet you still see banding all over the place in the real world. Just because there are methods to mitigate this issue doesn't mean it's excusable. Fuck off.

>You have people seriously suggesting the latest bleeding edge tech that isn't even released in most cases, and hardly affordable for consumers as an alternative to consumer displays from the 90's as if that's sensible from any perspective.

You don't need bleeding edge tech to have a TV or screen that looks better than CRT. I have written a lot on this topic, as I am a big fan of CRT for retro gaming and being a FW900 owner I recognise there are good aspects of a CRT screen.

The native contrast meme and color accuracy is not really relevant when no CRT monitor is capable of displaying a sharp image that is absolutely necessary for the content that is released today. The image is simply too soft compared to modern LCDs for even the best CRT to have any usage for watching media or modern games. Color accuracy and contrast is atrocious as soon as you crank up the brightness, just a terrible experience. Comparing my FW900 to my Q9FN, I have never met a single person who would prefer watching a movie on the FW900, it's just an insane argument to make that a CRT has better image quality than these screens.

So by all means, get a CRT screen if you are into retro gaming, it's incredible especially if you have a high-end monitor for it, but do not get it for image quality as that is just absurd.

Posting fallacy baits as thread starter means you are going to get people who are going to take a shit on you. Generals have nothing to do with original imageboard culture either yet here we are.

*sips*
Zoomers don't know what they're missing.

Attached: IMG_2167.jpg (3840x2880, 2.48M)

the FW900 is a poor excuse for a high-end monitor.

what does the 20 years refer to? what happened in 1999?

>1999 was 20 years ago

LCDs start becoming affordable in the early 2000s.

>TFW you will never enjoy the crisp lines of a vector monitor...

Attached: maxresdefault(2).jpg (1280x720, 94K)

Fuck off back to /vr/, cuck.

Oh hey, OLED, with the same burn-in, but heavier and more expensive!

if tvs were perfect you wouldnt buy a new one every few years though. What reason do they have to perfect it?

It's still a hell of alot more than what most plebs had when CRTs were around

>5g is more of a danger
False.

>CRTs don't have burn-in
lmao

There is. actually it probably looks better

Attached: rear projection.jpg (4416x3312, 1.11M)

What's the current/newest gimmick screen? I was under the impression OLED was FINALLY reaching 'possibly affordable to non-enthusiasts' this year coupled with UHD also 'competing' but what's coming after that?

CTRs are shit

it looks great more artsy but the text though?

>I was under the impression OLED was FINALLY reaching 'possibly affordable to non-enthusiasts' this year
You where under the wrong impression
OLED still isn't affordable in any monitor form, It's only really "affordable" in TV from which is still $1500-2000, granted you are getting 4k 120hz in an OLED so it doesn't seem that bad of a deal but it's still a hell of alot more than what most people spend on a display

>TV

Attached: 1550203277186.png (501x445, 205K)

>CRT doesn't have burn in

Attached: crt.png (925x658, 1.04M)