Why do some people act like CRTs had no scanlines and emulators created them out of nowhere?>it was not noticeable from a distance!ok, why can't you do the same when emulating and sit farther away then?
Scanlines are visible in darker pixels, but blend together in bright ones.These people don't get it, man.
>>11042257Consumer sets typically used a mask and didn't look like that to begin with.
>>11042257never once did any CRT I ever owned look like either of those
Because lots of people owned cheap dogshit sets. Scanlines were typical of trinitrons, and most people were too poor to buy Sony.
all crt trannies are obsessed losers who don't remember how shitty crts were and how glad we all were to be rid of them>noo i need my giant glass shitbox or else i'm not having any fun!!
>>11042284obsession with high-end displays used to be contained to weirdos and autists. then the TV industry needed a reason to convince people to upgrade to The New Thing so they forced the "picture quality" meme until people started to buy into it.the human eye isn't capable of seeing the difference between a lot of these incremental alleged improvements in picture quality. your trinitron looks the exact same as a cheap magnavox whatever-the-fuck unless you're like a foot from the screen.
>>11042257You can't notice them unless you're three inches from the screen. The lines show up in photos and zoomers think that's what CRTs actually look like because they've only seen them in photos
>>11042296>muh zoomer boogeymanemulators were already using scanlines since the early 00s
>>11042298And they were stupid even then
>>11042307That's besides the point, the point is that some anons here passionately argue that no CRT had scanlines back in the day. If no CRT had scanlines then it is an emulation invention out of nowhere which successfully psyop'd millions of gamers. Which is most likely to be true, that many CRTs actually had scanlines, or that emu devs psyop'd the populace?
>>11042318I haven't seen anyone making that argument in over a decade. If they are why aren't you replying to them instead of making a thread?
>>11042383>I haven't seen anyone making that argument in over a decadeexcept I constantly see it here whenever someone posts an image of a shader>If they are why aren't you replying to them instead of making a thread?I did it and they never commented on it. So I'm trying again.
>>11042392Post an example of someone making this argument then. Archives are fine.
lookin' good thread?
>>11042257>it was not noticeable from a distance!Yes, exactly. You weren't supposed to stick your nose right in front of the TV, that shit could melt your eyes.>>11042298>emulators were already using scanlines since the early 00sYes, and back then those emulated scanlines looked like absolute fucking ASS. I usually just turned on the bilinear filter on and called it a day.
>>11042396Search for 'scanlines' in desuarchive/warosu and suit yourself. I'm already wary of anons doing this tactic of trying to waste my time. Then it will be another qualifier and so on so they keep dodging the central question.
>>11042428I have 5 CRTs, 2 27" 2 32" and 1 20". The 20" does not really have scanlines, but all the others definitely do, and they're always noticeable, even from a distance. I don't know what shit ass TV you had back then but all of mine are late 90s early 2000s
>>11042257>why can't you do the same when emulating and sit farther away then?Different technologies.For one, the physical pixels of an LCD are going to result in a far sharper image than the refracted points of light of a CRT ever could. The inherent interpolation of an analog medium is lost, for better or worse.And two, the sheer brightness output of proper tubes coupled with how our eyes process and adjust to light (cameras do this differently, making photos terrible reference points) meant those blank lines generally weren't visible. On a consumer set, you'd need to crank down the brightness significantly or sit mere inches away if you wanted to see scanlines (which you never would).The biggest problem with CRT and scanline shaders is that people put way too much effort into replicating the cause rather than the effect; while scanlines and shadow masks are definitely present on CRT displays, you'd typically never see them in normal use.The ideal CRT shaders are, ironically, the simplest. And CRTs, being analog, were all different anyway.
>>11042295I'm near sighted and I could still tell the difference. It's not even a propaganda thing, I noticed the difference long before I even knew Trinitrons were considered superior.
>>11042478>I don't know what shit ass TV you had back thenOne where the scanlines weren't noticeable from a distance. I wouldn't call that a "shit ass" TV, quite the opposite.
>>11042547>>11042284Scanlines have nothing to do with trinitron, and trinitrons dont look automatically better.comparing a low end daewoo to a sony is like comparing a 50$ android to an iphone nowadays.Phillips, Mitsubishi, Panasonic and plenty of other brands created great TVs often better then sony
>>11042547no you couldn't and no you didn't.
>>11042257People that say they don't most likely only have smaller sets with low TVL so the scanline separation is less noticeable, but still thereIf it wasn't then 480i would look like absolute dogshit
>>11042295>>11042670>t. guy who thinks anything better than a 60hz 1080p monitor and pack-in membrane keyboard is tranny shit
>>11043297>If it wasn't then 480i would look like absolute dogshit480i is just alternating 240p frames. The separation not being apparent wouldn't negatively impact that at all, and would make it look better if anything.
>>11042257>Why do some people act like CRTs had no scanlines and emulators created them out of nowhere?Literally nobody, ever, has made that statement but you. Ever.
>>11043353>and would make it look better if anything.No, it would literally look like 240p
>>11042257That's when you take a picture of them. When you look at them with your eyes the lines tend to bleed into each other.
>>11043364it would just look like bob deinterlacing afaik
>
>>11043324your eyes and brain literally cannot register a difference between 60fps and higher framerates144hz monitors are a meme
>>11042257Those people are idiots who think because their particular CRT they grew up with didn't have strong scanlines none of them did.
>>11042280Many of them did. Gain knowledge before posting again.>>11042295lurk more zoomer
>>11042257My PC CRT has no visible scanlines.
>>11043436>PC CRTwell duh
>>11043427lurking more won't change the fact that you can't tell the difference between 60fps and 120fps. your eyes and brain are literally physically incapable. also, I'm in my 30s.
>>11042257Why do some people call the gaps INBETWEEN scanlines "scanlines"? Anyway, I've never had a set with visible gaps.
>>11043465>t. brainlet
>>11043436It will if you run it at 640x480.
>>11043482Because that is what the word means in the parlance of /vr/. Definitions change over time. We call the lines of graphics (most technically these are the true scanlines in terms of CRT science terminology) the raster or raster lines.
>>11043482Are you PAL?
>>11043364Not quite. It's still displaying more information. You're really looking at something like picrel.You'll notice that there IS a separation between lines at 240p, but the gap is illuminated by surrounding points and made far less apparent especially at a distance.
>>11043542We're talking hypothetically if there was no separation anon
>>11042284Trinitrons were common as fuck. Today trinitron is almost fucking synonymous with CRTs in america.
>>11043547I certainly wasn't. I was talking about the gap not being apparent >>11043353
>>11043417I'll agree that frame fluidity beyond 60 is a bit of a meme (racing and boomer shooters aside) but 60hz vsync is a god-awful latency penalty. Running 60fps on a VRR-capable >60hz monitor is far superior. I'd just about rather deal with tearing than the lag vsync introduces on a 60hz monitor.
>>11043591The annoying thing about vsync latency, is that it shouldn't even be a thing. Turns out graphics card drivers are to blame. When you enable vsync the driver adds additional hidden swap chain backbuffers to increase pipe-lining. There is no option to disable this.
>>11042257Part of it is that they don't know any better. They're so young they've never seen a CRT IRL.But the main problem is that they've been brainwashed by a cult of stupidity. They're told that their opinions are facts, their "lived experience" interpreted through that is reality. They can therefore never be wrong.If not for that second part, they'd simply learn the truth and say "oh cool. I never knew that. I like to learn something new every day"
>>11042257>another dumb fucking zoomer thread starting with "Why"
>>11043801Why are you gay
>>11042295>used to be contained to weirdos and autistsWho do you think failed at gatekeeping you from where you objectively didn't belong?
Emulation scanlines will always look like shit and wrong without the bright pixels bleeding over onto each other.
i had a big ass 29 inch crt and i couldn't see scanlines but when i saw close i could see the individual pixels
>>11043417do you faggots come off an assembly line or something?
>>11043417It's pretty obvious when I play Rocket League.
>>11043801yes how dare these fuckers use WORDS?
>my 350 TVL consumer set has visible separated scanlines! Buwahahahah
>>11043540doesn't matter, most ports didn't optimize for 288p
>>11043417>your eyes and brain literally cannot register a difference between 60fps and higher framerates>144hz monitors are a memeIf that's not bait and you really can't see the difference you might unironically have neurological damage. Sometimes I update my GPU drivers and it switches back to 60hz for some reason and I immediately notice it. Even just moving your mouse pointer around feels laggy at 60hz
>>11044650>Even just moving your mouse pointer around feels laggy at 60hzAlways makes me laugh when guys say shit like this.It feels laggy at 144hz too.
>>11044668it will stop feeling laggy when we finally achieve 8000hz
>>11044689>8000hzwhat monitor size or ppi?
>>11043353>would make it look better if anythingI had a problem with CRTemudriver drawing both interlaced fields at the same position on on of my TVs for some reason, it doesn't look better, it looks way more flickery than normal interlace, very ugly.
>>11043565I've never seen a trinitron
>>11043565>poster age: 22
>>11044668Possibly your polling rate is lower than the refresh rate. Even if you set 1000Hz polling in the OS, it doesn't mean the mouse controller actually gives 1000 unique samples per second. Many MANY mice actually just send doubles and triples and only actually poll at 125Hz. That would give you a nasty frame pacing like judder that's usually more noticeable than a perfect half rate.
>>11042257>Why do some people act like CRTs had no scanlines and emulators created them out of nowhere?Because of me. It's a troll I've been doing for decades now. But I grew tired of it. Nice laughing at you for all that time.
>>11043565You're not wrong in that they were everywhere: every store display, every promotional stand, every studio, etc. But very few people owned them. TVs were luxury items and a Trinitron was like, DOUBLE, what a similarly sized shadow mask was, and most kids gamed on the hand-me-down TV.>>11042257The simple answer to your question OP is that emu devs understood what scanlines were, but they lacked the knowledge of how to implement a sufficient emulation of a glowing raster scan on a PC monitor at high performance, so they did things that were less than great and people would cope and say it was "like a trinitron" instead of admitting that it was a bad look.
I literally don't remember seeing dark horizontal lines all over the fucking screen when I played video games back in the 90s. So either they weren't noticeable, or my brain just filled in the blanks. Either way I feel no need to artificially reproduce the effect in modern displays.
>>11044650works on my CRT monitor.LCD is deprecated tech and only good for digital watches
>>11044862NTA, but I own 3 (PVM-14N5U, KV-32FS120 and KV-13FS110) and received all of them for free.The only one in my home growing up was my Dell computer monitor and the only others I remember seeing in anyone else's home were my grandparents and a handful of friends' parents. Financially well-off people typically had Sony TVs from what I noticed. Continues today with people who have Bravia TVs in their homes.
>>11045029Everything about this image screams transgender
I like the shadow mask look and always have since before I even knew what it was.
>>11045046lmao you couldn't be more wrongthat anon is an (pseudo)autistic overweight hairy retard
>>11045030i had a 42 in toshiba in the early 2010s, felt like a king
>>11045061not pseudo im fully diagnosed and licensed autistic
>>11045046people obsessing over trannies are fare more likely to end up trans retarded nigger
Anime does look great on a tube TV (I don't think live action movies do at all, the flicker is pretty bad). But you're not going to see scanlines as it is interlaced.
>>11042280You can see scanlines through a mask, retard.
>>11042295This. The average normie's perception of a "good" or "bad" TV up until the latter half of the 90s was whether or not it was "color".
>>11044998>Either way I feel no need to artificially reproduce the effect in modern displays.Like 'em or not, scanlines help to give definition and clarity to 2D graphics
>>11044862If you're older than 25 you've probably seen one and didn't know it.
>>11045097yeah but fuck normiesnormies are the reason tech sucks now
>>11042257They're practically invisible on a regular consumer CRT, even if you sit close to it. Most people didn't play on PVMs.
>>11043407Just how I remember it.
>>11045097>more bullshitlmaoZoomie just can't stop being wrong.
>>11045097>outing yourself as australian
I greatly prefer the look of crts. pixels distract me to be honest
>>11042284I had a Trinitron, and it never looked like I was trying to play a game through the door of a microwave.
>>11046331none of them do anon
>>11042265Every shader since 2010 reproduces that.
>>11043417You're stupid. That is all.
>>11042257>muh CRTswhy arent you just using a CRT emulator if you love them so much? they're cheaper than whatever you're using right now
No one in this thread plays video games
>>11046635Why would I? I'm not a baby anymore.
>>11042257i have a 14inch jvc on my desk and the scanlines aren't noticable unless i put my face close in 480i because they move but theyre very noticable for 240p content
>>11042257
>>11042257Scanlines are the lit/video partBlank scanlines are only visible in higher line setsOn a typical 80s and early 90s low budget CRT with low TVL and coarse phosphor pitch you didn’t see blank lines whatsoever, you could see some screendoor effect instead if you were very close to the screen.
>>11042528>The biggest problem with CRT and scanline shaders is that people put way too much effort into replicating the cause rather than the effect; while scanlines and shadow masks are definitely present on CRT displays, you'd typically never see them in normal use.You are a clueless moronBetween Koko Aio shader, Megatron, Cyberlabs etc. we are living in a golden age of CRT shadersNow all we need is superior displays that are bright and rugged enough to display shaders while using BFI to reduce motion blur
>>11043353>480i is just alternating 240p framesIt is notYou get 480 lines but at half the framerate effectively
>>11046872>half the framerate effectivelywhat.
>>11045029CRT is deprecated techLCDs are still being made and Liquid Crystals are still being researchedThere is still potential in LCDLCs can be made to be nanosecond responseLCDs also can do pixel-level dimming if they can get the 2 layers thin enoughStill early days yet though but LCDs aren’t done
>>11046875You get 480 lines at 60 interlaced fields(30 progressive frames)
>>11046878nigga... by your logic 480i 60fps games can't exist.
>>11046890480i is an interlaced resolution so it displays in odd and even lines and not with progressive framesThe game can runs at 60 frames per second internally but display at 60 fields per second on the screen60 fields per second is still technically the same temporal resolution as 60 frames per second but it is more flickery due to its interlaced nature
>>11046895Yes, so in truth you get 120 incomplete frames per second.
>>11046901NoYou get 60 interlaced frames
>>11046909You get the first field and then the second field some amount of milliseconds later
>>11046780>>11046782These must be doctored. Scanlines don't exist, anon, they're a hoax.
>>11047153then it would be a black screen
>>11043417You’re supposed to make the bait a little believable
>>11046890Not sure you understand how fast it is
>>11046862>>11042257this is my old crt it didn't have scanlines
interlacing is trading temporal resolution for visual visual resolution, ammount of information stays the same, hence why it's the same bandwidth required
>>11042257I was at a hipster arcade bar thing the other day with OG hardware and it’s been a LONG time since I played actual arcade hardware versions of street fighter 2, metal slug, magician lord, and pac-world and I was genuinely impressed with how scanlines and “bloom” were factored in. Anyone who says otherwise is a fucking lying cocksucker. With arcades, at that distance, they’ve been factored in and utilised.
>>11047247It's: "temporal resolution for spatial resolution"
>>11046780>scanlines on a DS game
>>11047253yes ds lite has built in composite output/ picture in picture mode its disabled from factory though
>>11047242i am seeing scanlines in that image lol
>>11046876no potencial in lcddead end tech for 60 yearskys retardthe only reason lcd were developed at all is because they are dirt cheap to make and retards slop it up for thousands regardless
>>11047295Draw them. I see the mask but no scanlines.
>>11047305I see scanlines being displayed on the mask.
>>11047305>I see the mask but no scanlines.then it would look no different than it looks turned off
>>11047268CRT doesn't make a difference in these games, as it does on the SNES
>>11047242Why the fuck would you see them with a mask over it? What do you think they are? Do you understand the order of events?
>>11047331>CRT doesn't make a difference in these gameswhats that even mean
>>11046869
>>11047687kek
>>11047437The games weren't designed with scanlines in mind, so you won't get any visual improvements to the graphics like >>11046370
>>11047824sure but you wouldn't see that on a high end tv crt anyway kek the pixels are very crisp
>>11046876A polished turd is still a turd. LCD is an abomination that life times of effort and billions have been wasted futility attempting to make it not suck.
>>11047824That's half true. While the games weren't made with CRT artifacting in mind, there are some benefits.>larger display size>blended dithering>better color accuracy>less ghostingLow-resolution content in general tends to benefit from being on a CRT.
>>11047858*futilelyI know. Verbs and nouns are confusing sometimes. :(
I fucking hate scan lines on those Uber retard Sony TV's. Give me a shitty cheap crt with blurry fucking pixels on a composite signal any day. That's what old games were literally designed for and it has soul
>>11047880I have noticed that my language skills have been declining of late. Sometimes forgetting common words, and sometimes even the concept. Going senile in your mid 30s, being a NEET shut-in is really bad for you.
>>11043607>When you enable vsync the driver adds additional hidden swap chain backbuffers to increase pipe-lining. There is no option to disable this.There is. On Nvidia/Windows it's called "Low Latency Mode". You can also limit FPS slightly below the refresh rate. Another option is using "Fast Sync" but that's something slightly different.
>>11047242You can very clearly see the gaps thereDo people think they're always supposed to be a completely black space or something?
>>11047324You've drawn straight lines when the true shape is more of a honeycomb. The darker spots aren't blank lines, but the walling of the shadow mask; they're visible even at 480.
>>11048494>the walling of the shadow masklol what?the Mask doesn't have horizontal lines it is the electron gun scanning a line
>>11047860>Low-resolution content in general tends to benefit from being on a CRT.i use my crt for a lot of stuff even movies and youtube look good on it because it hides compression artifacts
>>11042257because scanlines are more obvious in photographs than they ever are in real life.
>>11048521>the Mask doesn't have horizontal linesThat's exactly what I said. Anon draw straight lines when there are no straight lines pictured.
>>11048969If your argument is whether a line is straight or not then you're barking up the wrong tree anon
>>11048494>You've drawn straight lines when the true shape is more of a honeycomb. Those straight lines are literally the beam, aka the line scanning, the scanline, nothing to do with the mask. The honeycomb effect comes from the mask. It's very well noticeable with white, you can see the darker regions between horizontal lines of white. >The darker spots aren't blank lines, but the walling of the shadow mask; they're visible even at 480.The darker lines are literally the space between scanlines where phosphors aren't as excited on the mask. I'm starting to think this is bait, in which case, enjoy your (You).
>>11048494>they're visible even at 480.Of course they are. Why shouldn't they be? The CRT isn't that tiny or very low TVL.
cheap 30" magnavox, the scanlines are soft, but visible. I think this is the average experience, not the sharp, heavily distinguished lines of a PVM.
>>11049546>Why shouldn't they be?You wouldn't get the so-called "scanline" effect at 480 since both fields are filled
>>11049614>You wouldn't get the so-called "scanline" effect at 480 since both fields are filledYou'd literally get twice as many scan lines. lmfao.
>>11049614What are you talking about, even 480p on a 21" low pitch, high TVL VGA CRT has *VERY* obvious scanlines.
>>11049674Nta, but do you have any photos? I don't remember gaps when playing PS2 decades ago. Then, again, my last crt broke in 2012, so I don't have the clearest memories.
>>11049681Probably because you played 480i on a average consumer CRT TV. You won't have as noticeable separated scanlines as 240p on a CRT TV or 480p on a VGA CRT.
>>11042257Poorfag here with no scaler, is this one any good? on sale
>>11049739These are retrotink 2x clones and they are very good and simple to use. I've tried them many times at my store.
>>11049665>You'd literally get twice as many scan linesNo? 240p is just 480i with the second field empty. 480 scanlines in all, but half are blank at 240p.
>>11049686That seems right. My games were in 480i, both on PS2 and Wii. So, the gaps are related to TVL, aren't they?
>>11049582>I think this is the average experience,An inch from the screen and zero brightness?
>>11049830>No?ESL?>240p is just 480i with the second field empty.No. You're just tapping words you saw.
>>11042280Ah yes, the regurgitated nonsense by retards in an echo chamber.
so, scanlines bad, or scanlines good? reading the thread didn't make it clear for me
>>11042257Even from a photo, the real thing looks better than any filter
>>11050818You know shaders these days (you still keep calling them filters) have a million of adjustable parameters to make them look just like that photo, right? In the end it all bows down to this. You see a screenshot, and scream "I DO NOT LIKE THIS, THIS ISN'T LIKE MY FAVORITE ANIM- I MEAN CRTS!", not getting that perhaps another guy likes it or it looks good for his monitor but not yours. And on that basis you dismiss the concept of shaders altogether, rather than ever bothering to open one of those complex shaders and try playing with them as a thought experiment, and see everything is not as simple as "le shader is... le bad!". But I get it, no one is ever invested in proving himself wrong, so you keep peddling "le bad" narrative. Anyways, what I wanted to get at is, if you wanted to make a shader look like that photo that looks so good viewed from your monitor, you could.
>>11044668It doesnt. Not nearly as much anyway.
>>11046938But is the second field one frame ahead in the game?
>>11049537Youre saying the scanlines are vertical?
>>11050809>i went to the park and watched pigeons shitting on chess boards>i still don't know how to play chess>how could this be?
>>11043407Lookin good
>>11050847If the game had been designed to run at 120fps, sure, because you get 120 field updates a second (60 per field)
>>11050965Just keep in mind that the interlacing would look horrendous this way
>>11049830The second field isn’t empty it just overlaps the first one
>>11051002>overlapsWhat are the mechanisms for this
>>11050809Scan lines are the image, how visible the line is aesthetically up to youTo me, my set has the perfect look
>>11051007What do you mean by mechanism?The electron gun just does what it’s told
>>11051014What do you mean by overlap?
>>11051015One field does a line and the other field repeats the line so you get a progressive 240 at 60fps
>>11051018>repeats the lineThat's not what overlapping means. More importantly, there is no digital function in the cable to duplicate the lines, that just makes no sense. Moreover, the existence of the visible "scanline" phenomenon immediately debunks this.
>>11043465What a weird thing to say. I have an OLED laptop that can go up to 120 and the difference in cursor movement between 120 and 60 is incredibly obvious.
>>11051025It is in this context because I’m talking about the lines alignment>Moreover, the existence of the visible "scanline" phenomenon immediately debunks this.You’re just trolling right?
>>11042292Based. I only like CRT for composite consoles because they look like dogshit on HDTVs. If I'm emulating, it's going to at least be bilinear filtered with no scanlines and possibly HQ2x or similar and if it's 3D it's getting upscaled.
>>11043324it is.t. sent from my 1080p 60hz monitor from a membrane pack-in keyboard. To be fair, though, the monitor is actually a 40 inch HDTV and I actively fucking hate mechanical keyboards and wouldn't take one for free.
>>11045029Larp
>>11051025>there is no digital function in the cable to duplicate the linesYou just can't stop saying stupid shit can you
>>11051184Mate, the cable cannot specifically instruct the TV to duplicate each line and there are several reasons why:>1. The analogue technology itselfIt is an analogue signal. All the cable transmits is straight, honest to goodness electricity at a precision not high enough to carry any instructions for a TV to execute, never mind that CRT televisions do not possess the circuitry for copypasting fields, never mind that a CRT television does not know whether the signal is 240p or 480i because both have the same frequency, 240p is just 480i with an empty second field.>2. TV limitationsThe vast majority of CRT televisions, even among those WITH component inputs, do not have any capacity to progressively scan both fields like you are suggesting because the necessary hardware isn't there for it.>3. Pic relatedDoes this image look like the second field has been duplicated, or filled whatsoever?What are you trying to achieve being a 240p denier?
>>11051512lol. What even is that stinking shitpile of cope stacked on cope stacked on stupid? You just keep making up shit to argue against because you're absolutely clueless. I sincerely hope you get the help you need.
>>11051596lmao youre getting btfo'd
>>11051512Are you schizophrenic?Who or what are you even arguing against
>>11051596>You just keep making up shit to argue against>>11051018>One field does a line and the other field repeats the lineKill yourself>>11051670See above
>>11042280you know that modern emulators have shaders with dot masks, right? You can even choose what kind of diode you'd like and count them when you zoom in.
>>11051683>One field does a line and the other field repeats the lineYes. That's exactly how it works. And that doesn't mean, imply, or suggest any of the crazy shit the voices are saying it does.
>>11048345>You can very clearly see the gaps thereWhy do you idiots lie?There are no scanline gaps thereThis is like saying there are scanline gaps in modern tvs because you're looking at it with a microscope It's just the gaps between the phosphors
>>11047251You are full of shit.US Arcades and Japanese Arcade use different CRTs to begin with so what you're seeing in the US is not developer intent anyways.
>>11047824>The games weren't designed with scanlines in mindNo games ever were you stupid fuckNo games ever were designed with scanline gaps in mind
>>11047687>>11047808You are an idiot too
>>11052215There's literally vertical lines where the phosphors are more excited on the mask pattern. Are you blind?
>>11052215that's a slot mask, it would have a honeycomb pattern and not lines, so what you're seeing is not gaps between phosphors jesus
>>11047302>>11047858CRTs took 70 years to not suck assLCDs are about 20-25 years old at most
>>11049582There is no scanlines hereThat's the phosphor gap
>>11052239That's the phosphor pitch you stupid fuckThere are no actual scanline gaps like you get with higher line sets>>11052246You are literally seeing gaps between phosphors you stupid idiotYou aren't seeing venetian blinds like you do in a high TVL PVMemeDot/Stripe/Slot pitch are all similar thingAll phosphor masks regardless of type have a finite resolution of how sharp they can render things
>>11052247LCDs are fundamentally flawed, even given a million years they would still suck.
>>11052268holy shit you're dumb
>>11052272All tech is flawed.
>>11042257You are a total faggot. OLED + crt-royale-ntsc-composite.slang.less space, less energy consumption, less eye fatigue = more bitches.
>>11052129You already raped the word "overlap", now I want to know what you could possibly mean by "repeat" if not fucking repetition?
>>11052298royale is the most tryhard shader out there
>>11052253>let's turn the whole argument into semanticsyour autism knows no bounds
>>11042292i just like the retro aesthetic.
>>11052669>You alreadyNo didn't. Seems your little baby brain is incapable of understanding how an anonymous board works.>raped You will immediately cease and not continue to access the site if you are under the age of 18.>now I want to knowNo, you don't. You want to argue about something you think you understand, but don't, and probably can't."Repeat" is a perfectly good word to use to describe which set of lines are displayed in fields for SDTV non-interlaced video. Whereas with interlaced they "alternate"
>>11052235It's been two days, stop being a bitch.
>>11052253you can clearly see the phosphor grid, and the dark between the scanlines
>>11042257>LCD has longer view distanceCRT LOST
>>11047324>>11053520>expecting zoomers to understand anything
>>11053525Anon, that is PS1 vs N64
>>11042257240p over s-video had well defined scanlines on 25" CRTs or bigger. Small consumer CRTs never really showed them.
>>11053525
>>11053451You have no rebuttal because you are a troll, whatever.
>>11054054>btfo>u-u-ur trollI accept your concession
>>11054304lol
>>11054304You're the one who's consistently given no rebuttal and stumbled over the English language (much like your arguments, your English too has not had its correctness demonstrated).
>>11054491>u-u-u must rebut an ignorant psycho
>>11054519And yet MY concession is the one that has supposedly been offered?
>>11054531Correct. But don't feel too bad. You haven't lost completely. You only conceded to me. You can still argue with the voices in your head about all that other shit no one here ever said.
>>11042257Fuck the N64 was a HIDEOUS console
>>11042292I don't miss the odd size/weight distribution but I lament the death of light gun games. I hear really mixed things about the modern ones so I'm hesitant to buy one. I'm worried it's going to feel like a wiimote.
>>11043407lookin' good
>>11054660So you never said "repeat"? And you most certainly never misused "overlap"?
>>11055272Modern light guns are okay. Honestly, even the PS Move wasn't half bad from a latency perspective, even though the accuracy was atrocious.4 point tracking, which is what Gun4IR and Sinden, the only commercial light guns you can buy, is good in terms of accuracy and latency. In some ways it's better than the old tech, machine gun titles are a lot more accurate. The problem for me is the atrocious minimum distance requirement, which nobody else seems to have a problem with but I really hate, because it means you're forever stuck with a tiny picture until you buy a 120" screen, and even then it's small. For a typical home setup on a 24-32" monitor, it's really bad. Secondary problem is that Sinden is a hassle to set up given you need to apply a border to all your games, and there are various workarounds and hacks to do it, and the Sinden gun feels like shit in the hand.Personally I use a completely different lighthouse-based system with slightly lower accuracy due to suboptimal tracking placement and occasional misalignment which I still haven't been able to pin down, but it works fully on every game I've tried (one required a custom patch to an input wrapper), and more importantly lets me use a 40" screen from 1-2 feet away. I think eventually we'll see some kind of real time camera processing that removes the distance limitations of current solutions, or someone will build an arcade like 12+ point tracking solution that reduces the minimum distance limit to something more manageable for most users.
>>11046780>PVM and not a consumer TVretard
>>11055592Are you ok?
>>11057550No arguments because you are trolling. Pending new evidence, you have been schooled.
scanlines arent a good thing
>>11058618then why are you in a CRT thread?
>>11058618how do you see the image then??
>>11058618are you saying CRTs are bad?
>>11058543>Pending new evidenceThere's no new evidence to give. You've been told how non-interlaced SDTV works. No more evidence will make you capable of reading or understanding it.>you have been schooledAnd apparently you haven't. Hence your inability to read.
>>11042257Scanlines weren't really noticeable on the small shitty screens most kids played their games on.I only remember seeing them in arcades.
>>11058697You're the one who doesn't know what repetition is. Or overlapping. Upon every possible interpretation of your insinuations being destroyed with simple facts, you have run away to hide behind "well...I didn't mean it THAT WAY" and calling me stupid instead of articulating what possible way you could have possibly meant (presumably because such a way doesn't exist and you are simply saving face). I don't understand what you get out of being so intellectually dishonest on a messageboard about 20th century televisions, it's not like you're campaigning for president here.
>>11059861Repetition is you, yet again, claiming I said things I didn't, even after you've been corrected multiple times. If that's not just plain old stupid then it's something much more serious. You should probably get an MRI.It sucks your first summer here is being ruined because you don't know how old TVs work. Life lessons. Don't pretend to know about shit you don't understand. Lurk moar.
>>11060290Stop pretending to be a senior. You previously suggested I was a minor for using the word "rape"—presumably because you yourself aren't particularly old and are therefore unfamiliar with the more dated sense of the word. Anyway, you have consistently refused to articulate your point and have accused any counterargument of being a strawman due to some ever-changing esoteric idiosyncrasy of yours. I gave you a dissertation about how these televisions and cables work, and you simply said "NO U" without further elaboration. Despite this, you have continued to insist on the correctness of your position, as you are doing right now, without the slightest address of any facts.
>>11042257What kind of fancy-ass TV did you have back in the day where you could actually see the scanlines?
>>11060315Every CRTYour perception of the gaps is most likely from shaders
>>11042257shitty rf and composite signals make everything so blurry and muddled it almost doesn't matter if there are scanlines or not. Scanlines on my pvm don't really matter until at least svideo. Growing up we almost always used rca composite or rf on our crts
>>11060315The high light output makes it so you'd almost never see individual scanlines from a normal distance, unless you're using repurposed monitors from production or medical equipment.Close up, *most* CRTs made after the 80s are sharp enough to make out individual scanlines, but even then there are some outliers. Cheaper sets tend to have more blending between the vertical lines, and that's what most people grew up with so it's probably what looks "right" to you. Super sharp lines aren't typical, and you only really see it with PC monitors outputting a low resolution, the aforementioned production and medical monitors, and misinformed people chasing those effects through shaders.
so basically anyone who complains about scanlines was a poorfag with cheap sets all along?
>>11060685More like they're old enough to have grown up with a CRT.
>>11060696what if they're so OLD enough that they could afford good CRT sets in the 90s and early 00s and see more noticeable scanlines?
>>11060685so this is what it comes down to?>I-It may look like shit for 240p games, but my TV proves I'm rich!!
>>11060702>what if they're so OLD enough thatWhat if you learned English?But to answer your question, they'd probably have bought a flat Wega instead of a 14" production monitor.
>>11060707>>I-It may look like shit for 240p gamesif it looks like shit, why did arcade manufacturers and developers pick those monitors with noticeable scanlines then?
>>11060713Arcade manufacturers recycled existing JAMMA-compliant hardware, which was not exclusively used for 240p anyhow. The fact it looked different from most people's home sets also would have helped in marketing the arcade experience as exotic and premium, even if the visible black lines are not necessarily superior (this is not exclusive to CRT monitors but is just marketing 101; Apple's entire brand thrives on this concept).
>>11060721Reads like a cope to me
>>11060726
>>11060685Anyone that complains someone likes something they don’t, needs to touch grass
>>11060434>Your perception of the gaps is most likely from shadersYes, because I don't see them when I use a real CRT. Maybe it's because the CRTs I've owned have all been cheap consumer models, I don't know.
>>11060707>NOOOOO SCANLINES OBJECTIVELY LOOK LIKE GARBAGE STOP LIKING THEM NOW!!!What causes someone to take on this opinion?
>>11062028*empty linesScanlines are the ones you can see
>>11062021Yes anon, your perception of them being like window blinds is solely because of shadersThey are still visibleEvery time someone shows them on this board saying “they’re not visible” are either blind or the screens are too tiny
>>11051854Emulation has made such brilliant advancements goddamn
>>11043324Correct
>>11042257Yes it was there and it was never something you would want you stupid nigger. As soon as we could get rid if this shit we did and now faggots like you will swim in this shit to the end of times because its retro.
>>11062159>I was always miserable and hated everything I ever had all of the time STOP HAVING FUNAre you okay Anon?
>>11062159Now you got rid of CRTs and now your retro games look like ass
>>11062063So how big of a CRT do you need before they become visible?
>>11064262theyre visible on my 13 inch trinitron I bought in the 90s. I can seen them with mine own eyes
>>11062382NTA but shaders exist and nowadays they can look really damn good, all jokes aside, it's fine.
>>11043324Keyboards are undoubtedly tranny basedtuber crap
>>11042257because most people had shadowmask CRTs
>>11065352Stop, we’ve already had this argument multiple timesThe mask type is irrelevant
OLED + crt-royale. Is it a good alternative to crt?
>>11065910The hard part of CRT-royale is finding a shader you like. I've seen many shader threads, and 99% of the time the image looks like total fucking ass to me, it's either a crappy recreation of a 14" budget TV some kid had in the 90s as a hand-me-down from his parents, or it's some garish bloom abomination.The shader I use happens to look almost identical to my PVM. But it falls down a bit for 480i games. OLED is a meme, but if you can get BFI and 144hz then maybe the ghosting won't be so bad. The one real advantage that modern screens have is you can get them much bigger without dealing with shit like rear projection or needing a crane to get a 200kg TV into your room. It's very nice to have a 35"+ screen.
>>11065328Not enough glow... and it's too clean aswell.
>>11066408Show us a screenshot Anon
>>11068885The thing with shaders is they're like assholes. Everyone's got a different idea of what one should look like, and they all stink.
>>11068917Tell you what though, with society's increasing anal fixation, there's more consensus on what an asshole should look like. I truly believe the same applies to CRT shaders.
>>11051108>I use a CRT but other people are trannies if they do it
