Do you think CRT monitors will ever go back into production? They do it with photography film and cameras for enthusiasts.
>>108226722No.
>>108226730What he said
Listen kid I grew up with CRT'sWhen flatscreens showed up suddenly my eyes stopped fucking hurting for some reason after long screen hoursFuck CRT's
>>108226734>long screen hoursHave you tried getting a life
>>108226722Fuck these nigger screens. My old CRT was so heavy I almost died a couple of times while carrying it, and I had no desk space.
>>108226722>Do you think CRT monitors will ever go back into production? They do it with photography film and cameras for enthusiasts.Realistically the only way that could happen would be if dozens of tiktok videos were made promoting CRTs, paying Indonesian bot farms to boost it in the algorithm and get it to the point where normie tech illiterate women talk about it to the point it becomes fashionable enough for corporations to take notice.All it takes is money and patience
>>108226753>My old CRT was so heavy I almost died a couple of times while carrying itTranny>and I had no desk spaceBroke tranny
>>108226775>to the point where normie tech illiterate women talk about itnever ever, CRT has zero sex appeal, it's not fashionable, no normalfag could look at one of those bulky-ass pieces of shit and think "I want one" no matter how much shilling is done for them
>>108226753
>>108226787>>108226826I was literally 12 years old back then.
>>108226816If Alien Isolation's cool aesthetics failed to popularize CRT screens, nothing will.
>>108226722I never thought film would be produced again due to how insanely toxic it is, but here we are.having said that, people expecting a 2000s flat trinitron ever again can prepare to be disappointed.
>>108226835it's ok this is a safespace
We’re not allowed to choose what devices we use in our daily lives. Those choices are made by men far wealthier and more powerful than we’ll ever be. We’re just cattle being wrangled. There’s nothing we can do. We WILL use the state-mandated Little Saint James-approved flat panels and we WILL like them. Erase your memory of tech that was clearly better.
>>108226835KWABWhen I was 12, I carried two CRTs under each arm up a flight of stairs.
>>108226722I kind of doubt it. I'm not an expert but other than the film camera obviously lacking the electronics of a digital camera, I don't believe it is significantly different and doesn't require any highly specialized components to make. Things like fancy lenses have lots of applications, so they are still made. The film can't be that hard to make, so it's "easy" to make film cameras for enthusiasts.With CRT screens I think the chance of them coming back is slim because nobody makes the tubes anymore, as far as I'm aware. The tube was a specialized component, it's no longer being made today and any effort to bring a CRT screen to the market would have to start right at the beginning, with making a factory to make the tubes first. I imagine it would also take a lot of know-how to make high quality, high-resolution tubes as well, I'm sure it's technically possible but you also have to ask yourself how many people with this knowledge the industry still has left and how much documentation from the olden days remains. How much re-inventing of the wheel would the industry need to go through to reach the same quality as the late-era CRTs we had, and how much new research would it take to exceed that?Basically I don't think it's financially viable due to the immense amount of effort required to get such a product off the ground when the associated industry no longer exists.>>108226835What the fuck were your parents doing, letting a 12 year old kid move a CRT screen by himself?
>>108226751Have you tried getting a job?
>>108226923Yes but union dues for gloryhole workers in my country are much too high
>>108226722No, the people who knew how to shape glass are 90 year old now
i love crts, but i don't see them coming back even in limited runs.it's similar to the "we destroyed the technology" moon meme, crts require an industry to produce, and the incentive to create said industry no longer exists. it's not the kind of thing you can reasonably make short runs of
>>108226886>What the fuck were your parents doing, letting a 12 year old kid move a CRT screen by himself?I wanted to LAN with my frens
>>108226722It was explained 10000000000000000000000 times already.There's no fucking way to produce them on small scale and the interest in using them is limited to pitifully small number of fanatics.Forget about faggot-like stories about buzzing, burning eyes, how heavy they are etc. Primary and most important reason is that production of CRTs fucking sucks and NOBODY is willing to build factory worth millions of dollars just to make like 10000 monitors for fat and old nerds.
>>108226923>OK, where?
>>108226886>What the fuck were your parents doing, letting a 12 year old kid move a CRT screen by himself?when i was 12 most monitors were between 13 and 17", not terribly heavy>>108226972and yea, if you wanted to bring your computer to a friends' place what choice did you have? that's just what we had. we're not talking about 27" living room televisions here
>>108226979Also you can add to that fact that a lot of components and materials used in CRTs are illegal in most places so now you not only must build a factory, but also firstly develop and produce new components that will not be nuked by EU's and USA's environmental laws.Amount of shit that any company would need to do to go back to producing CRT is just insane and not possible to go around and even if - they would be quickly and swiftly murdered by the fact that there's no way to make money on CRTs.
>>108226979>It was explained 10000000000000000000000 times already.yeah dude, there's no way conventional wisdom can ever be wrongit's not like people are just uncritically regurgitating the same information over and over again. the more you say something, the truer it gets>NOBODY is willing to build factory worth millions of dollars just to make like 10000 monitors for fat and old nerds.perhaps a fat old nerd... who is also a billionaire?
>>108226886Tubes are definitely still made, even in America. Still used in military and medical fields. Thomas Electronics, I think there was another one too, but I can't remember the name.
>>108226722does anyone outside of troony toons and retro zoomers give a shit about CRTs? i'm in my late 30s and grew up with CRTs. they fucking suck.
>>108226835Pretty young for a tranny, but more power to you, sis!
We may see a CRT substitute if demand is there or an enthusiast wishes it to exist. Some old tech (especially old games) work better on those old screens.
>>108226722no they're shit
>>108226722No, because money. Photography film and cameras cost nothing to produce so you can make money producing and selling these to enthusiasts. CRT were very expensive to manufacture compared to LCD, this is the reason why they disappeared. The only goal of a company is to make money.
>>108226979>10000 monitors for fat and old nerdsThat's a decent number of potential buyers. Current gamers are buying $1k+ monitors for their gaming setup. A new CRT for 2000 dollars doesn't seem so unreal.
>>108227386>cameras cost nothing to produceThis is not true. Cameras need a high precision shutter mechanism and lenses require high precision polishing to function correctly. Those things are not cheap.
>>108226722I always thought that like, maybe they'd come back after the nukes go flying and they need to manufacture something reliable and analog. Otherwise like 100 years in the future when it'd be not so hard to make a new one and there's hardly any left so the demand is way high for retro gaming machines or something like that.>>108227061The tech itself is good I think. Just that the ones made for watching TV on weren't made to have HD or particularly straight images... The computer monitors were. Shit, there's a place clearing out with one in the empty room, since about half of the businesses in this cuntbag city where left-wing lunatics gload themselves into believing they're in paradise have closed down... I might have to stop by sometime soon.
>>108227061For a long time, if you wanted a gaming monitor on a budget, saving a 21" PC Trinitron or similar from e-waste was an absolutely incredible /g/-lifehack.These days though, LCD gaming monitors have gotten incredibly cheap. Even if they still wont be on par with what a top-tier CRT can offer, good tubes have become utter unobtanium, now only reserved for the most persistently autistic, or lucky.
>>108226826buying that for my pops his hands are fucked
>>108226722No, and I'm not that interested either. Much more interested in e-ink screens, and screens with better lighting that don't fuck your eyes into 100 million floaters.
>>108226722Film never went out of production and its manufacturing is trivial compared to CRT monitors. The cost to start up a new factory to produce CRTs that enthusiasts would want to buy, even in a small quantities, would be exorbitantly expensive. In other words, CRTfags are too poor to afford what they would cost. Go look up how much brand new reproduction vacuum tubes for hifi equipment cost and you'll get an idea how much money we are talking (easily >$10k).
>>108226775It would take billions to recreate CRTs, the entire technology is lost, you would basically need to recreate decades of technological development. Realistically the only way to bring back CRTs is creating a doomsday device, and then threatening to destroy the earth unless CRTs are recreated.
>>108226826I'd use RoboTwist on my dick.
>>108226734Was it running at 60 Hz? There was nothing more cancerous than 60 Hz CRTs.
>>108228828I agree, it's becoming a lost technology and most of the engineers are dying off. It would be possible if work started immediately, but it's clearly not going to happen. It's gone, it was good while it lasted. Only thing we can hope for is a display technology that can rival the motion of a CRT.>>10822906675hz is around when it stopped causing me headaches/eyestrain. PAL TVs (50hz) were the absolute worst.
>>108226722Not a chance in hell. It'd be prohibitively expensive for any small brand to commission the tooling alone, and any major conglomerate would laugh anyone who suggested it out of the boardroom.There is virtually no benefit to them other than if you're playing retro titles, and the industry by and large hates those people.
>>108228785why are CRT fags so poor compared to audiophile chads?
I've always thought it would be a fun project to try building a small, monochrome display. I used to work with vacuum systems and electron beams and would love to tinker around with that stuff again. The glass tube itself would probably be hardest to source. Otherwise it's just an electron gun and some electromagnets.
>>108229152>Only thing we can hope for is a display technology that can rival the motion of a CRT.it's possible, the problem is that few seem to even care about motion performance, which for me and anyone still clinging to crts is mind-boggling. not caring about motion performance... with a device whose near-sole purpose is to display motion?i never saw lcd monitors as a bad thing, because i didn't see them as a competitor, i saw them as office monitors, something that was good for viewing spreadsheets on. i was naïve. if "they" can sell you a cheaper product, they will find any way to do so, now we only have office monitors, and people have been convinced this is good enough.
>>108229193difference is that it's way, way easier to scam audiofags because nobody can actually hear any difference. you can say whatever bullshit you like about audio hardware and there's nothing you can measure to verify it, because those kinds of audiophiles don't even believe in measurements in the first place.go ahead and try and make a fake crt. do it. it won't work, the technology is just fundamentally different to anything you can buy new, you can't fake it.
>>108226722no. they are to obese. no one wants a landwhale on their desk. they are dead, and will always stay dead.
>>108229261i had one of those heavy gauge, $50 speaker cables. was super thick, extremely hard to bend because the sleeving was super thick. my cat got a hold of it and chewed the shit out of it. replaced it with the super thin, cheap, chinese cable that came with my speakers. i was nervous at first but, i can't hear a fucking difference. everything sounds identical. the benefit, the cable is easier to route to my desktop because its so much thinner.caused me to go down a rabit hole. i did the whole external dac and all that shit. was all bullshit.i learned my lesson. those audiophile cables and equipment are bullshit. entire community is full of snake oil.
>>108229193Listening to music on a dedicated hifi system in your houses is a more sophisticated and mature hobby than watching tranime or playing Sega on a 13" monitor in your dark smelly bedroom. Also CRT is an objectively worse technology than available displays. It is harder to fool eyesight than hearing due to our neurophysiology, so, like the other anon said, it's easier to fool the ears of audiophiles with deep pockets with mumbojumbo. Also consider the history of hifi and the aesthetic quality of high-end audio components, people will spend money on stuff that looks good as furniture that has zero function (like sculptures and shit richfags buy), let alone plays music. Until it is literally impossible to get a CRT there won't be anyone willing to pay for their actual cost, even audiophiles more often than not will just buy NOS or vintage tubes that are matched.
>>108226722They're way too energy-consuming for 2026.
>>108229335it's refreshing to hear a story from someone who believed it and learned from it. good on you anon.i'll add that i do get it, i do understand the desire to have "the best". the "high end" audio industry is just particularly rife with falsities that it can make things far more difficult than they should be. it's also not very intuitive to think that we reached human limits decades ago and that most enhancements you can do it really just down to speakers/placement/environment/preference.>>108229369your post betrays itself. what makes listening to music more worthy of sophistication than playing a video game, objectively?>CRT is an objectively worse technology than available displays.not in all ways, which is the point
>>108229445Music appeals to all people from all times and you can share the experience in comfort with lots of people while CRTs are only good for niche hobbies that weird freaks like and are so small only one person can use it at a time. >not in all waysIn the ways that matter to almost everyone yes they are inferior.
>>108229503i don't engage with trolls
Hopefully not.
>>108226722Gonna let you in on a secret lil zoomie: CRTs sucked. Not only did they have shit quality and take up a lot of space, they also made a constant high pitched whining noise. The fags saying you need them to play old video games on just want to turn a piece of obsolete garbage they have lying around into something they can "flex".
>>108229517I'm not trolling.
>>108229503So you don't care about motion? 20 years later they're still trying to get close to CRT motion with BFI etc.
>>108229538>>108229774[ yu}
>>108229743CRT has one advantage over other screens that is moot when you consider they're bigger (in the useless way), smaller (in the useful way), heavier, louder, hungrier, duller, uglier, less reliable, less connectable, less available, and so on.This is not difficult to understand.
>>108229807it's a video display, the purpose is to display moving pictures.saying this is "just one advantage" is downplaying it significantly. motion performance should be just about the most important aspect of a /video display/.
>>108226722Wow look at all those vibrant-AAAAAA MY EYES HELP OHH THE SCREEN'S SHEDDING LEAD ALL OVER MY DESK THE PHOSPHORS ARE BURNING OUT HEEEEELP!!!
>>108229538(you)
>>108226722Better use those laser mirror things, no reason to bother with inferior and more complicated technology.
I'm still waiting for Palmer Chudley to reveal something about his Quantum Ray Tube CRT like.https://youtu.be/fgY5fM2cINc&t=1297
I'm sure kickstarting crt production in 2026 would require you to get multiple 90 year old engineers with specialized know-how on the subject together in the same room, get them to actually collaborate, train a factory's worth of people and somehow fund all the millions of dollars worth of production equipment on top of all that.And all that just to sell literally thousands of these things while fighting all kinds of regulations, logistical nightmares and warranty issues.It's just not going to fucking happen.
>>108226722Doubtful. OLED's could have the motion handling of CRT's but they don't because it's not seen as being worth the tradeoff in brightness.
>>108227061When is the last time you used one? I got a Sony HD CRT from their last generation in 2005 and the picture quality is astoundingly good. The colors are so natural and bright. The contrast is OLED-like. The picture quality is so natural and pleasing unlike anything anything else I've seen. And the motion crispness is on another level. It makes watching an LCD feel like you are drunk. The main drawback is its small size and lack of sharpness, but even the latter is an advantage for older games that expected CRT's to soften the image.
>>108229152> Only thing we can hope for is a display technology that can rival the motion of a CRTThey could do it right now, they don't want to.
>>108229369> Also CRT is an objectively worse technologyCRT is a superior technology, modern displays have all kinds of weird issues.
>>108226753Victim weight faggot
>>108226722lost technology. nobody who knows how to make big dumb crt monitors is even alive still.
>>108230865They are not that old. They were being made 20 years ago and Japanese live to like 100. That doesn't mean setting up supply chains would be cheap.
>>108227386>The only goal of a company is to make money.Sad, but ford v dodge pilled.
>>108230741>When is the last time you used one?uhh close to 20 fuckin years ago?
>>108230237this.
>>108229369>furnitureOld tvs looked fucking kino.
>>108230648>kickstarterReally? Noone tried that yet?
>>108226775>Realistically the only way that could happen would be if dozens of tiktok videos were made promoting CRTs, paying Indonesian bot farms to boost it in the algorithm and get it to the point where normie tech illiterate women talk about it to the point it becomes fashionable enough for corporations to take notice.god i hope this happens imagine
>>108231293It'd be nice solely because it will force people to go back to 1280x1024 and lower which might make the internet suck less if it really catches on.
>>108231316its not even unfeasable weve got a bunch of qwerty phones coming out this year because theyre currently popular with tiktok normies
>>108226775How hard is to make fake ai vids of ethots pushing for CRTs and bot farm it to the top of the algo?
>>108230990Then you forget. You probably fell for the flat-screen meme like everyone else and thought you were using superior technology with your big ugly LCD display.>OMG it's so thin!>Look how big the screen is!That's how most of us thought back then. Now thinness and size aren't a big deal any more and we want picture quality again. OLED's are the best ever in many respects, but CRT's are still the best ever to do it when it comes to motion handling and natural color reproduction. It's very noticeable with gaming.
>>108231327Zoomers are figuring out that physical buttons are superior and touchscreens are annoying and stupid. We only fell for the touchscreen meme because it was new and innovative in 2007. Now they are used for everything and it's annoying AF when you have to deal with some laggy unresponsive bullshit on a screen instead of getting tactile feedback and an instantaneous response from a button. Also why I won't buy a car from after 2011.
>>108231551yeah new cars are slop my cutoff is around 2008 form cars not sure id go into the 2010s my current is from 1994 i think, previous was 91. newer ones just do a bunch of stuff for you i dont like i just wanna drive my car dont want my car in control also i got a blackberry kek. chinks have made new mobos that run android its comfy
Too many specialized parts for such a niche item. They're never ever gonna retool factories and start up production lines for them, sadly.I wonder if the same applies to plasma. I miss plasma TVs, and it would've been nice if the tech were still being advanced. Even comparing the 2000s to the early 2010s models, they made a lot of advancements in terms of weight, power efficiency, and screen retention. Imagine if we were able to get lightweight low power high refresh 4k plasmas. And fuck OLED
>>108231831It's like 1 specialized part lmao.
>>108226826
>>108226722Maybe if openai buys up all the oleds
>>108226722No, and stop asking.t. your dad
>>108231831>fuck OLEDBesides burn in/degradation and motion clarity on older displays, what is wrong with it? It is brighter, higher color coverage and depth and higher resolution and refresh rate than the other displays it replaces. And on Plasma vs OLED, we already had that comparison years ago and OLED has only improved since then.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLdkiyYeod8
>>108231088That's the TV you stacked your working TV on top of.
CRTs are insanely cool but they have many, many downsides
>>108230780No, CRTs were inferior technology is vast majority of use cases and they are not coming back.
>>108231831I still have a 2013 high end Panasonic plasma and they aren't as great as people make them out to be. You know how annoying the ABL of OLEDs and CRTs are in bright scenes? Multiply that by a factor of 10 and you get plasma's bright-scene performance. Watching any content brighter than Taxi Driver is just miserable compared to a middle of road oled like my LG C2. Not to mention the permanent film grain on everything (and eventual red dots of death to tell you your plasma has cancer). Don't get me wrong, the motion clarity is absolutely magical and having it on a flat panel without having to stare at the the inherent geometry issues of CRTs on scrolling content is a godsend. But Plasmas are just as much of a meme as CRTs. Advancements of modern OLEDs make day-to-day use infinitely better. No, your living room is not a perfectly dim 6500K windowless 50% gray room so you can use it at settings that mostly negate the downsides. OLEDs were the way of the wind if you take into consideration how the improvements of PPI on PDP panels plateaued hard during the tail end 20 odd years of its reign.
>>108233722Works on my Plasmabtw ABL was never an issue with CRT monitors, aslong as you dont crank contrast to max like an idiot which ruins the image in multiple ways
>>108233728>t. cave dweller
>>108226722Theoretically speaking a CRT could pe pushed to 1440p 120hz - ish, I reckon in the future some enthusiast billionare who wants to see if its possible will open one assembly line but i bet they'll retail for $2000-$4000.
>>108228052People always make fun of stuff like this because they don't realize it's super useful for many people, be they old, disabled or even just someone who temporarily has their arm in a cast or something.
>>108231180You don't realize how insanely expensive it would be to restart full blown CRT production. Making the machines to make CRTs would be an insane investment. It would only make sense if you somehow found an old factory with all its machinery intact, or if you were 100% sure you could sell millions of them at very high price to retroomers.
>>108226730fpbp>>108226722CRTs require a lot of specialized tooling to produce, so no.Also photographic film never went out of production in the first ace.
>>108233127What a beautiful schematic view. I have a feeling that the illustrations were much better back in the 90s/early 00's
>>108233736I calibrated my CRT to 50 nits full white brightnessGood enough for me and its super sharp at that resIf you want eye melting brightness old monitors are not for youCRTs can do over a hundred nits, but you get massive haloing which ruins image quality, more flicker at higher brightness and sharpness takes a nosedive because the harder you push a crt the more blurry it gets
Altough I have the feeling my colorimeter might be lowballing crt brightness, because it feels alot brighter then an LCD at 50nits, its perfectly usable even in indirect sunlightwho knowsVery vibrant and looks good to me thats all that matters
>>108226722No.1000Hz screens are on the horizon, so motion clarity would finally be solved after two decades.The only pillar left would be the resolution argument, where CRTs look sharp whatever pixel grid you throw at them. However, with 4K, that is hardly an issue, especially with frame generation. Digital designers these days aren't pixelfucking anymore anyway, so the use case for custom resolutions is nearly non-existent.I have 500kg+ of crt tech in storage, and for some niche things they are still the cheapest and best option. For 99% of you, it doesn't matter.
I miss plasma TVs but CRTs sucked ass and it's creepy how a bunch of kids here are pretending to be nostalgic for them
>>108226722It will happen because I want it to.
i hope not. we should instead pool our efforts into micro-LED and if that fails, mini-LED with enough dimming zones and fast enough processing to make the glowing and latency non-issue.
>>108231527gaming on anything but a crt makes me feel ill because of the fucking horrible motion blur. crts display movement perfectly even for incredibly fast paced games.
>>108226722Film is a cheap consumable with wide appeal and low barrier to entry, and never stopped production.CRTs are expensive and difficult to manufacture/transport/do anything with, completely ceased wide production, and could hope to maybe sell one or two each to niche subset of a subset of a hobby.They're not coming back.
>>108229209>The glass tube itself would probably be hardest to sourceBig Erlenmeyer flask, if it can hold up to the pressure. Small ones can no issue.
>>108234399$2000 for a nice high resolution/refresh CRT would be a steal for a lot of people.
>>108234912>1000Hz screens are on the horizon, so motion clarity would finally be solved after two decades.It's not quite that simple. A 1000Hz display will indeed have much improved motion clarity, but only as long as you're actually driving it with 1000 different frames each second. If your actual content is running at 100FPS and you display each frame 10 times, then you get 100Hz level motion clarity.You either need to run at 1000FPS for real, or if not you have to use some form of black frame insertion to blank out all the "extra" frames, which reduces brightness. Running at 1000FPS isn't realistic for most games though, so you will probably end up requiring some fake frame shit with a very high multiplier which is less than ideal. On the black frame insertion / display blanking side, if you want variable refresh rate to work properly (you do want this, it's a major advantage for modern displays) it's even more difficult because varying frame rate combined with some form of display blanking will result in varying brightness, which is not going to be acceptable.Increasing refresh rate certainly improves motion clarity but it's not as simple as it sounds. That's why shit like Pulsar exists, you basically need tailor-made solutions for it to work properly with real-world use cases, just refresh rate alone isn't going to cut it, the refresh rate is more like a basic requirement and not a final solution.>so the use case for custom resolutions is nearly non-existentThis is extremely ironic when DLSS and FSR and their friends exist as bespoke, complex solutions to this problem, which would not exist at all if modern displays just looked good at lower res by default.
>>108226734This, niggas who were actually there dont even fuck with CRTs anymore, anyone who goes out of their way to adapt a digital signal to RCA for TV or somehow adapt it to VGA on a newer computer that doesnt output digital is a straight up schizo luddite.
>>108235404Anon I grew up with CRTs and I have 6 within 10 feet of me right now. Connecting to a CRT isn't complicated and makes it sound like you're a retard or larping as older.
>>108235404Nah, I still use mine if I play an old game. 240p games don't look right on modern displays even with integer scaling, I'd say even more "modern" 480i stuff which was often 3D tends to look best on a CRT TV because you can't really see how low-res and stretched the textures are. On the VGA monitor side, 640x480 or 800x600 isometric / sprite PC games also look best on CRT screens. I agree that there's no real reason to use them with modern games, I guess unless it's a modern throwback title which actually runs at 240p or something.
>>108235459Dude im like 30 years old, thats practically an unc, I am quite literally done with CRTs I'll take my GameCube games beautifully upscaled on my 1920x1200 screen over that 480 lines bullshit, if they were good, people would be still fucking using it.
>>108235404i bought a displayport to vga dac for like $5 anon, just because they aren't provided on gpu cards anymore doesn't mean you can't buy them separately
>>108235509good for you i guess but more pixels can't replace that razor sharp motion
>>108226722the whole infrastructure to build it in scale is now likely gone for any foreseeable amount of time
>>108235496>240p games don't look right on modern displays even with integer scalingi've tried playing n64 games on a 4k tv using crt royale and it's pretty convincing, for 30fps (or lower) games where motion isn't great either way, it's a pretty similar experience
>>108235584CRT shaders are definitely a lot better than a direct integer upscale with humongous-looking pixel chunks, but if I've got the real thing anyway I don't, why even bother with shaders and shit? I just use the real CRT.
>>108235613sure, i still prefer to use my crt tv. i don't actually own the 4k tv anymore since something hit it and it broke since they're so fragile. i didn't replace it because i only had it because someone gave it to me. on that note i can say i did actually compare the experience with a crt tv, i even customised the crt royale plugin so it looked as much like my tv as i could (in terms of a static image it was really close, the plugin is very customisable)
>>108235509Looks good to me.
>>108235509i'm i'm "practically" 36. you think you're the only one 30+ here these days?
>>108235709I am 36, and anyone who's born after 1994 at the latest is just a zoomer who thinks they're a millennial because the goal posts moved but they're not.
>>108235744i don't really care about the ages of crt enjoyers, my point is only that it's not just youngfags who still like them
>>108226722Maybe if some billionaire becomes obsessed with them or some Chinaman finds some working CRT tooling.
>>108226734Its funny, LCDs hurt my eyes more than CRTs,
>>108235404I still use the same CRT TV I had as a child to watch TV and play vidya.
>>108226864I'll take cheapo Korean tubes. Just anything that can display an VGA signal at 100Hz.
>>108226886The military still pays for new production picture tubes for aircraft and ships. Non picture cathode ray tubes are used in a lot of stuff like X-ray machines and guitar amps, so there's always going to be a manufacturing base for vacuum tubes.
>>108226935You do know that glass working is still a trade in active demand, right? Where do you think all the jars in the grocery store come from?
>>108234399Existing tubes could do that if you upgraded the electronics. That is one real shame about CRTs dying when they did, the actual tubes had so much more potential that was held back by electronics. For one, VGA was holding back CRTs a lot, forcing a high bandwidth analog signal down several feet of cable is really very bad. You could have much higher video bandwidth if the CRT had a digital input and placed the ramdac right on the neck board.
>>108229152>75hz is around when it stopped causing me headaches/eyestrain.Same for me, but I have found that 60 Hz TVs are fine as long as I stand a decent distance away from them. Maybe you should have listened to your mother when she said not to sit so close to the TV.
>>108229209I saw a guy make out out of a mason jar once. If you're fine with the picture being really tiny (and having a few x-rays escape when its turned on) just about anything will work. I think I even remember one made from a light bulb.
>>108236385Not all phosphors fade in the same time, it's possible for screens intended for lower refresh rates like TVs to use longer-persistence phosphors to lessen the flicker.
>>108236407crts are, effectively, a fancy incandescent light bulb. crts have existed for well over 100 years, they're not /hard/ objectively to make some form of them. rather making high quality ones cheaply at scale is the hard part
>>108235496>you can't really see how low-res and stretched the textures areI used to play emulators (mostly GBC) on CRT and even then it was so upscaled (nearest neighbour) you could clearly see the low res. And I fucking liked it that way. I don't get these people who want blur to hide the low res. The low res looked good. Period. If I wanted to see blur I'd just not put on my glasses.
>>108236954You should actually look at these games on their intended displays at some point and you'll notice they look quite good.
>>108236983I did, back then. I'm telling you I liked the upscaled nearest neighbour of emulators much more than playing on Mega Drive on the "real thing" of blurry CRTs, but you guys can't accept that not everyone saw your holy grail as the best thing since sliced bread like you do. God, you guys sound like audiophile fags sometimes.
>>108237012>upscaled nearest neighbourYou mean you don't even increase the render resolution on a modern screen, you just look at fuckhuge chunky pixels and insane aliasing like that? Fucking deranged.
>>108236954Try playing them in the proper resolution not scaled at all. It won't be blurry and it will look amazing.
>>108237062I like big.>>108237045I don't like blurry.Simple as.
>>108237074It would still be big if you're using a big screen.
>>108237074Pic related, a PS2 game running at native res, integer upscaled (4x) to my 4k screen. Looks real fucking sharp lmao, it's like you're intentionally choosing the worst of both worlds.Deranged, like I said
>>108236954>>108237074i'll never understand people who insist they like <one method> but put down people who like <another method>you can prefer 320x240 games integer upscaled with gigantic square pixels on a big lcd if you like. i prefer them as variable-size scanlines on a crt myself
>>108237149Played mega drive on the living room TV, which was bigger than the pc screen. Is that proper resolution enough? If not, then they made a mess: consoles for kids should be just werks. If yes, then I still fucking prefered playing it on emulator on the biggest nearest neighbour I could on my pc screen (when it was crt to when it wasn't anymore) because big nearest neighbour looks sharper. Picrel? I like right more. Always have.>>108237201Looks like right pic to me.>>108237222You do you, bud, I'm not complaining. But since I posted that everybody is saying I shouldn't enjoy <my method>.
>>108226722yeah if enough people clamor for them, someone will start making them. and if those sell well, we're back in business
>>108237236>Looks like right pic to me.Yeah, because that's what it is and that's why I said these 480i games look best on a CRT TV.
>>108237236That pic was the first one I found. This one is one I actually played on the mega drive and emulators. I really played this game more than anything growing up. Still play when I have time.I still wish you guys get your dream CRTs back one day, I just don't see it as the end all the best thing evar period.
>>108237236>You do you, bud, I'm not complaining. But since I posted that everybody is saying I shouldn't enjoy <my method>.idk, the reply chain suggests you are or are agreeing with someone who calls using a crt "a schizo luddite", that doesn't sound to me like someone who accepts other peoples' preferences
>>108237282No man, you're not schizo luddites. As I see it, I'm the one being flamed for not loving CRTs as much as you guys do. I just started the first reply offering my 2 cents as someone who lived thru that and emulators better than CRTs, as a counter example to the entire thread being "no, you weren't there, CRTs were so much better!!!1!"Sorry if I came off wrong. Again, I hope you guys get your CRTs. Like I said above (even giving some (dumb) suggestions on how to achieve it) on other comments that aren't part of this particular reply chain.
>>108237236>>108237276Why do these comparisons always show closeups of single sprites/images instead of the whole frame? Nobody plays with a magnifying glass.
>>108237300you're alright, just need to keep in mind you're talking to multiple peoplei first saw/tried emulation in 1999, when we were still using crts. i even used emulators on consoles such as the ps2 and xbox, again connected to crt tv's. emulation alone doesn't mean "big sharp pixels". i emulate things to this day and output them 1:1 to my crt tv's, in fact >>108235546, not that anyone would know unless they saw the first time i posted that picture over 10 years ago, /is emulated/. that's dolphin, not a gamecube.first time i saw an emulator was a parents' friends' kid running pokémon yellow, which wasn't even out yet at the time. that was pretty chunky even on his 14" win95 pc crt, but i can't say i've ever liked said chunky pixels, even back emulating on pc crts i'd usually opt to set the crt to a low resolution to minimise how chunky they look. pixels aren't supposed to be sharp squares, they never have been. i don't know anyone who likes them, except now i suppose
>>108226722film is consumable so if anyone wants it you can keep making it and selling it. 35 mm film never went out of production, although the fact that they've resurrected polaroid does surprise me.crts are not consumable and there are a stupid large number of them in the world. enthusiasts as well as the few remaining commercial needs are easily satisfied by that stock, so it seems unlikely that anyone is going to make it.(film cameras, typewriters, etc. that are not consumable face a similar fate)
>>108237350Idk, I assume it's because the whole screen would be too big for a quick comparison?>>108237367I emulated back around that time too, don't remember the specifics. I do remember playing pokemon with the big chunk squares and loving it. I played it on a real GBC too, with the muted colors and I liked the bright white chunky squares way better! I was a kid, I liked drawing on Paint (I still haven't found a good alternative for Linux that looks/feels like old Win 95 Paint) and I'd zoom all the way in and do what would now be called pixel art (although I sucked at it, I really liked drawing Windows buttons and bevels). I fucking hated when they turned fonts to "sub pixel antialiasing" and other shit, because I liked looking at the individual squares of FixedSYS (to this day I can't tell what people mean when they talk about muh linux shitty font rendering).Bottomline is I really fucking liked those big chunky squares. For me, that's what pixels were always supposed to be.
>>108226722yes I do, simply because demand keeps growing for them.At some point if the options are either pay $1,200 for some half-modded PVM or Trinitron or buy a new CRT using updated tech that maybe costs a bit more, all the expensive manufacturing overhead would be worth it just to eat some of the market demand.I would be stoked to see a next gen tube...
>>108236498I know but I've had the same effect on any different CRT TVs, even cheap low quality ones. It also helps to have the lights on.
>>108237505>It also helps to have the lights onYeah that helps when looking at screens in general. Even with other screen types it's not good to use them in complete darkness, at least not for long.
>>108237424well that's good for you i suppose. chunky pixels are the easiest thing to render. they pretty much hurt to look at for anyone with good eyesight though.and to be clear when i mean "pixels aren't big squares", i mean that in an objective sense. a "pixel" is defined as a the smallest unit in a digital image, that is, a pixel is an image sample, so it has no specific shape. since digital images often (though not always) have a sample ratio of 1:1, one way to display them is as filled squares. objectively they're more like infinitesimally small points, but those are hard to see. a crt raster line isn't "objectively correct" either, and i don't want to suggest that it is, outside of games designed to be played on crts, in which case that is at least the intended viewing method of said pixels. though i do also understand that "intended" doesn't mean "ideal" or "preferred" either. i have played some games upscaled (specifically 3D games) from their original resolution, and in some ways that can look better to mei'm mostly just surprised to see someone say they actually prefer big sharp square pixels over anything else
>>108237530>overtly long disclaimerYeah, I see what you mean. >i'm mostly just surprised to see someone say they actually prefer big sharp square pixels over anything elseNow I'm surprised I'm that rare. I always assumed it was more common.
>>108237548>Yeah, I see what you mean. i tend to go into more detail when i'm drunk>Now I'm surprised I'm that rare. I always assumed it was more common.i couldn't say how common which method is from another, though i can't off the top of my head think of anyone saying they specifically prefer just big unfiltered square pixels. the only time i'd ever post images like that is for more scientific purposes, like to show a pixel perfect image while still being scaled up for easier viewing
>>108237548>I always assumed it was more commonWith 240p 2D sprite games maybe, those actually look sharp, but 480i 3D games have too much aliasing, built-in blurs, low quality transparencies and so on to actually look particularly sharp.
>>108226864Film never went out of production
Big chunky pixels are an invention of the 2000s, nobody back then thought of graphics that way.
>>108237758i'm not sure if you noticed but the cartridge artwork you posted is literally using chunky pixels
>>108237776Must have posted the image by accident.
>>108237665OTOH, I was amused that poeple would waste so much time making those funny filters to make scanlines and other assorted shit just to make it look worst than pure unfiltered big square chunks. I assumed it was a mix of the programming challenge with a bit of coolretroterm appeal.>>108237698640x480 games on PC I could see the square pixels, mostly because I'd screenshot and zoom in on Paint too, but I like it squarey. Mostly sprites, 3D stuff I mostly played on ocnsoles only, because my poor pc didn't have a "3D acceleration card" (what we called GPUs back then) so I eventually stopped playing 3D games past PS2 and focused on emulators only on my cheap pc.Sidenote: I remember when I got a job and enough money to build my own PC and buy a GPU, I asked the guy for a "3D acceleration card" and nobody had any idea what I was talking about. Kind of like VLDL's flat clicker.
>>108226722
>>108226751We don't do that here
>>108237818>those funny filters to make scanlines and other assorted shitBest if they do it for GameBoy and other LCD based systems.
>>108237873this kills the lcdfaghttps://youtu.be/oA4Gi6sx4FE
>>108237818lol yea i remember "3D accelerator required" on some games. i'm not sure how long you took to end up getting one, but it must have been a while since that would have been a recognised term at least to about the mid '00s
I can see it being produced as a luxury oddity market, but the tech to make CRTs is really expensive when compared to modern display technologies simply due to there being less materials earmarked for CRTs. Not too mention, CRTs are extremely dangerous to build and repair and the safety nets that existed required non-retard workers which unfortunately we have alot of. The only way it could come back is as a specialty market, you will never see new CRTs in a best buy or at scale production on Amazon.
>>108238386Microwaves are 100 times more dangerous than CRTs.
>>108238355Took quite awhile, I NEETed a lot. In 2009 I got a pc from mom, still no dedicated GPU, so I think it was late '10s.
>>108238499non-ionising, fully-shielded radiation box you stand in front of for seconds at a time 100 times safer than an x-ray gun shielded by some leaded glass which you stare at for hours at a time?
I will forever regret not getting a FW900 or Master Pro 512/514 before prices got insane. Always wanted a high end crt but missed the only window when that would have been possible.
No, they are an inferior technology that belongs in a museum.
>>108226751If you have a so called "life" then what the fuck are you doing here? Get the fuck out!
https://dotronix.com/This company still manufactures new CRT's
They are probs safer than modern screens but fuck your eyes up and look like shit. Trannys for them for some reason.
>>108239626>they still make itAnd here I was thinking you fags had ACTUALLY SEARCHED for it before making a zillion threads claiming it's gone forever. Just tried alibaba and the chinks have plenty of it to sell if you want to, pretty cheap too (except min. order 500 units). I'm sure if you faggots got together and organized, you could place a custom order for chinks to custom built you one to your specs.https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/21-R2-MK2S-21-CRT-TV_1600583640099.html?spm=a2700.prosearch.normal_offer.d_image.ce2467afODf6u3&priceId=46be6b14b8be45c9926211770664b7b5
>>108240933those are using new-old stock, the tubes are not manufactured anymore. there's only like 1 company still making tubes and it's only for like military/aviation repair purposes
>>108226722>Do you think CRT monitors will ever go back into production?Lol no. No one has time for that bullshit. They were shit. You weren't even alive when we had to use them. Go larp nostalgia somewhere else.
>>108231088>Wooden enclosure CRT TVMy favorite type of TV. Makes my cock hard each and every time.
>>108241343Just stop being poor and you can't a real TV like the rest of us
>>108241343Do u even dream in code?
>>108230768stolen by Netanyahu ....
>>108237372>enthusiasts as well as the few remaining commercial needs are easily satisfied by that stock, so it seems unlikely that anyone is going to make it.The thing is that every year there will be less and less available due to burnout
>>108241759well then either somebody will eventually start making them again or the market isn't really that big (or nobody wants to pay the actual cost of production for the actual market for these things)
>>108236285no it doesn't
>>108226722LOL, no. Never ever ever
>>108226734>I couldn't afford good CRTs75hz or higher
>>108238596People die constantly from messing with microwaves. Nobody has ever died from messing with a CRT.CRTs may use high voltages, but unlike microwaves, the amps are pathetic and can't hurt a fly.
>>108242192>Nobody has ever died from messing with a CRTCRTs are big and heavy as fuck, certainly SOMEONE has gotten their head crushed by one falling off something
>>108242278Ok yeah they have, but the original context was people repairing electronics
>>108242192>death by CRTDoes this count?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjEbJraj6mI
>>108236345I'm not sure if they're still doing it, but at least as of a few years ago you could still get new replacement controller units for CNC machines that not only had CRTs but also ran DOS and I think even had floppy drives. On a related tangent, some of those were for machines that were originally built in the early '00s but still had that '80s-style hardware too.
>>108228037absolute trintroon cope. Nice OLEDS mog everything about a CRT. Stop being poor
>>108242447OLEDs have garbage motion because they're sample&hold and not bright enough to pull of 1ms BFI
>>108242447not everything>>108238186
>>108234399>Theoretically speaking a CRT could pe pushed to 1440p 120hz>>108236375>the actual tubes had so much more potential that was held back by electronicsTheoretically yes, but the bigger problem are the yokes. At some point you just can't control the beam precisely enough. They're huge coils with big inductance, and you can't do anything about it, coils will be coils. 120 kHz horizontal scan is around as good as it gets without getting into superconductor wire bullshit, generating a higher-frequency signal wasn't that big of a deal even then, but if you want that signal to survive the yoke's inductance, you have to drive the voltage higher, and then you have to think about how to handle two kVA of reactive energy sloshing around back and forth through thin precise wires.
>>108234413Why are the people I see use them simply limp-wrists? If I saw an old person or an amputee use these I'd get it, but everyone I see use these is simply a clearly unfit but otherwise physically able man.
>>108242505>>108234399GE Siemens SMM21201P was a 200khz monochrome medical CRT monitor. That's fast enough to run 1440p 130hz. The technology already existed and was in production.
>>108242525And Sony monitors can be overclocked, here's one running at 150khz (enough for 1440p 100hz)
>>108242505to be fair there's really little benefit going beyond about 100Hz on a crt. like motion is great either way, and flicker is basically non-existent by 100Hz, so what else do you want?i've gone as far as 160Hz with my crt, but only to see how high it could go, for most uses even 85Hz is Good Enough™we're only seeing super high refresh rates with lcds because it can be used to try to minimise sample and hold blur, something that doesn't exist on crts
CRT TVs are the most "old thing good" slop in the world. It's uglier, more power-intensive, harder to repair, more expensive to produce, heavier, and prone to damage that ruins what little image quality it has. The only advantage it has is a higher refresh rate, which is so insignificant that it honestly doesn't matter unless you're literally a world-class gamer.They'd never re-enter production like film cameras because film cameras have advantages over digital, are cheap to produce, and have an independently prestigious history. CRT screens are shitty and were ONLY used because they were the only option. There are also so many CRT TV's in the world that ANY boomer's garage sale has one for, like, $10 so there's no point.
>>108242556>CRT screens are shittyThe 21" professional units are some of the best displays ever made to this day
>The 21" professional units are some of the best displays ever made to this day
>>108242578Cope
>>108226722technology is cyclical
>>108242578Redditors only care about bing bing wahoo CRT TVs. CRT monitors are oldfag /g/'s thing.
>>108226722No korean wants to work in factories anymore. SEAs are too retarded to organize and untrustworthy to manage an assembly line.
>CRTs are blur-ACK
>>108226722>>108226864>They do it with photography film and cameras for enthusiasts.Film never stopped being produced, only the consumer segment shrunk before starting to rebound. But there was always continued demand and production for the movie industry and special applications like aerophotography, surveying, military etc. where switching to digital was just not cost effective. Tooling and workflow for coating and retail packaging film is also much, much simpler than manufacturing and assembling even medium sized electronic appliance as a TV.Plus the economic factor, film is a consumable, a TV is not. There's no way you could sustain CRT sales in a long term, after every hobbyist got one.
>>108226722I'm pretty sure we will reach a point in maybe a decade or two where monitors can provide the benefits of CRT without being CRT. The question is how affordable that is going to be. Once this is possible you can buy a large case housing the monitor, put them side by side with an original CRT and customize it to be virtually indistinguishable from the one next to it. You could make it superior actually because the filters imitating the CRT can be customized to your liking.
>>108243351>The question is how affordable that is going to be.For now I think it makes sense to get a decent CRT if you can afford it and use it for whatever. The con being that you don't know when it's going to fail. It could probably last you until modern solutions become more affordable, but it's not guaranteed you could get unlucky.
>>108242556>The only advantage it has is a higher refresh rateNo. Modern displays have way higher refresh rates, but they still can't beat CRT's motion clarity. Pulsar monitors may be on par in regards to motion clarity, but idk if they will match the color quality of high-end CRTs.
>>108226886Classic film cameras required watch-like precision mechanics to operate the fully mechanical shutter. No company can really manufacture these anymore without having the cost of the final product skyrocket. Those new film cameras use similar electromechanical shutters as later film and digital bodies and can't function without a battery.Film itself never stopped being made if only for disposable cameras, professional photographers and cinema.
>>108243618Electronically controlled shutters were introduced in the late 60's. I wouldn't consider this the cutoff for "classic" cameras, but nevermind the definitions. Leica still manufactures fully mechanical cameras (like the M6 reissue), but yes, their prices are silly (though at least in part driven by collectors and brandfags, rather than just the cost of low volume manufacturing).
>>108227050I got tubes for my preamp. It's made in Russia.
>>108226886>What the fuck were your parents doing, letting a 12 year old kid move a CRT screen by himself?When I was 12 my parents would let me work on Old Testament computers with open frame CRTs, where upgrading the RAM was high voltage work.
>>108226787>>108226865>>108226871>>108227098fucking assholes but i kek'd so fucking hard!!thanks anons
>>108226722never say never record players are available at walmart so who knows what else will become uncool
>>108226826>>108228052>>108234413does that thing even have enough torque to do anythingseems like it would just fall apart under real stress
>>108247245Any idiot can make a record player from parts. The only thing that's semi-difficult is the phono cartridge, and even that's easy if you dgaf about ruining records. Which most post-gen X record enthusiasts don't.CRTs require massive capex to on tools to start mass producing tubes, and everyone who glazes CRTs wants late 20th century pro quality displays, which are the most ruinously expensive to make.
>>10822700017" monitors were typically anywhere between 50 to 60 lbs.27 to 36" monitors were 110 to 240 lbs.
>>108226722Yes, after the war
>>108226722I'm going to do it once I have won the lottery a few times. Wish me luck!
>>108229774FTFY
>>108229774Holy shit it's literally me
Idk why people push the CRT meme so far. a decent LED is on par with it and an OLED beat itIts only "superior" if you want pixel perfect 4/3 dvd stream or older retro games, beside that? Not needed
If some kind of very advanced near-molecular level 3D printing or energy-matter replication technology is invented, maybe. With traditional methods, no.
>>108242547>so what else do you want?Smoothness, obviously. The lack of sample & hold blur doesn't automatically mean the animation is magically smooth despite the low refresh rate. 100Hz is quite smooth but you can definitely see improvement even beyond that.
>>108242470oled isn't lcd
Tinnitus simulating, x-ray emitting, space heating pieces of shit
>>108249381>not TRANNYTROON
>>108237372>crts are not consumable andThe electron guns have a finite lifespan though.
Fuck CRTFuck LEDWe almost had SEDWe all missed out on the actual solution bc Jews wanted it cheaper
>>108226753Based. CRTa are a tranny hobby
>>108226722>Do you think CRT monitors will ever go back into production?Yes why would you think they wouldn't?
